THE  LIBRARY 

OF 

THE  UNIVERSITY 

OF  CALIFORNIA 

RIVERSIDE 

GIFT  OF 

Dr.  Gordon  Watkins 


AMERICAN   SOCIALISM   OF   THE 
PRESENT   DAY 


AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

OF 

THE  PRESENT  DAY 

BY 

JESSIE  WALLACE   HUGHAN,  Ph.D. 

WITH  AN  INTRODUCTION  BY 
JOHN  SPARGO 


NEW  YORK 
JOHN   LANE  COMPANY 

MCMXII 


HX83 
H6 


Copyright,  1911,  by 
John  Lane  Company 


THB  TTNIVBRSmr   PRESS,   CAMBXroCB,  U.S.A. 


TO 
MY  MOTHER 


Digitized  by  tine  Internet  Arciiive 

in  2007  witii  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


littp://www.arcli  ive.org/details/americansocialisOOIiugliiala 


CONTENTS 

PAGE 

INTRODUCTION.    By  John  Spargo  r*!-*.-.  •  i 

CHAPTER 

I.  Introductory      .  •• 7 

Socialism  a  force  to  be  reckoned  with  in  America;  conflicting 
definitions;  is  there  a  consistent  Socialist  movement  in  the  United 
States  ?  Two  parties  recognized  by  international  Socialism.  Sources 
of  information;  the  party  literature  and  leaders;  non-official  Social- 
ist organizations  and  sympathizers.  Subject  of  volume  the  belief 
demands  and  methods  of  American  Socialism. 

II.  Outline  of  Marxian  Socialism    ...'"...     l6 

The  definition  of  Socialism.  I.  The  Marxian  doctrine:  —  The 
economic  interpretation  of  history;  the  class  struggle;  the  crisis 
theory;  the  breakdown  of  capitalism;  Marx's  pure  economics; 
the  theory  of  surplus  value;  application  to  crisis  theory,  class 
struggle  and  cataclysm.  II.  The  Marxian  program:  ultimate; 
immediate.    III.  The  Marxian  method  of  attainment. 

III.  The     History  of     Socialism    in     the     United 

States 33 

Utopian  experiments;  immigration  of  German  radicals;  native 
labor  movement.  Formation  of  Socialist  Labor  Party;  conflict 
with  the  Anarchists;  political  activity;  relations  with  labor  unions. 
Later  Socialist  movements.  Schism  in  the  S.  L.  P.  Formation  of 
the  Socialist  Party.  Its  political  fortunes;  attitude  to  organized 
labor;  the  Socialist  press;  the  party  leaders.  Professed  Marxism 
of  the  party. 

IV.  The  Economic  Interpretation  of  History       55 

Acceptance  by  American  Socialists;  attitude  of  economists  outside 
the  Socialist  lines.  Exaggerations  of  the  doctrine:  fatalism;  ma- 
terialism.   Effect  of  doctrine  on  Socialist  policy. 

V.  The  Class  Struggle       ...   ,^ .   .^ ..',..  62 

Basis  of  American  Socialism;  various  interpretations  of  it  among 
Socialists;  effects  on  Socialist  policy. 


yiii  CONTENTS 

VI.  The  Theory  of  Surplus  Value 71 

Not  an  essential  of  Socialism;  attitude  of  American  Socialists 
to  theory;  revisionism;  relation  of  doctrine  to  theory  of  marginal 
utility;  the  great  contradiction;  the  iron  law  of  wages;  inductive 
demonstration  of  surplus  value  by  American  Socialists;  the  place 
of  theory  in  the  Socialist  movement. 

VII.  The  Theory  of  Crises 84 

American  Socialism  based  on  the  general  rather  than  the  special 
explanation;  unimportance  of  differences  of  opinion  on  the  subject 

VIII.  The  Breakdown  of  the  Capitalist  System      90 

As  a  philosophical  dogma;  as  an  economic  conclusion.  The  attacks 
of  the  Revisionists;  modification  by  idea  of  conscious  choice. 
The  concentration  of  capital.  The  proletarization  of  the  middle 
class.  The  increasing  exploitation  of  the  workers.  The  break- 
down theory  ideological  rather  than  mechanical.  Two  opin- 
ions among  American  Socialists:  the  revolutionist  and  the 
constructivist. 

IX.  The  Ultimate  Economic  Program    ....     118 

Part  I.   The  Details  of  Expropriation. 

Indefiniteness  of  Socialist  official  utterances  regarding  the  details 
of  ultimate  program;  this  indefiniteness  consistent  with  Marxian 
principles  —  all  ultimate  details  confessedly  tentative.  The  extent 
of  socialization.    The  process  of  expropriation. 

X.  The  Ultimate  Economic  Program 129 

Part  II.   Production  and  Distribution. 

Socialist  organization  to  be  a  development  from  present  forms; 
the  voluntary  cooperative;  the  labor  union;  the  state-owned 
industry.  Local  autonomy;  relation  of  industrial  and  p)olitical 
powers.  Incentive,  assignment  and  remuneration  the  chief  prob- 
lems. Equality  of  nature  and  income;  competition  in  the  Socialist 
state. 

Incentive:  —  pleasure  in  work;  joint  interest;  competition  for 
material  rewards. 

Assignment:  —  differences  in  ability;  distasteful  work;  Utopian 
suggestions;  hesitancy  to  apply  competitive  principle;  compulsory 
manual  labor;  competition  in  the  Socialist  commonwealth. 
Remuneration:  —  dividing-up;  distribution  according  to  needs; 
equality;  right  to  the  whole  produce  of  labor;  labor  check  system; 
unequal  money  wages.     Commodity  values  under  Socialism. 


CONTENTS  ix 

XI.  The     Ultimate     Political    and     Social    Pro- 

gram   152 

Political  program:  —  Socialist  attitude  toward  the  state;    toward 
political    corruption.      Internationalism:    war;    patriotism.     The 
Socialist  state.    The  political  democracy;    measures  advocated. 
Social    program:  —  the   social   democracy;   personal  liberty;    So- 
cialist attitude  toward  religion;  the  family;  education  and  culture. 

XII.  The   Immediate  Program  of  American  Social- 

ism    171 

Differences  among  Socialists  as  to  immediate  demands. 
Industrial  deiftands:  —  limitation  of  work-day;  factory  inspection; 
child  labor;   insurance;  compensation;  attitude  toward  "charity"; 
demands   relating   to   labor   unions;     restriction  of  immigration; 
relation  to  other  organizations. 

Political  demands:  —  unanimity  among  Socialists;  universal  suf- 
frage; agitation  among  women;  relation  to  woman  suffrage 
movement;  direct  legislation;  the  senate;  the  judiciary;  the 
Constitution. 

Administrative  demands:  —  taxation:  income  and  inheritance  taxes; 
the  tariff;   the  Single  Tax. 

Social  demands:  —  freedom  of  speech,  etc.;  free  administration 
of  justice;    education;    public  health. 

Collectivist  demands:  —  government  relief  for  the  unemployed; 
municipal  ownership;  attitude  toward  other  organizations;  public 
utilities;  land;  attitude  toward  government  regulation.  Dis- 
tinction between  Socialists  and  social  reformers. 

XIII.  The  Socialist  Method  of  Attainment:  Party 

Organization  and  Tactics 195 

Attitude  toward  physical  violence.    The  three  channels  of  activity: 

1.  The  cooperative.  2.  The  labor  union:  influence  of  Syndicalism; 
the  general  strike.  3.  The  political  party:  membership;  finances; 
the  local  organization;  the  state;  the  national;  the  international. 
Characteristics  of  the  Socialist  parties:  —  internationalism;  de- 
mocracy; discipline.    The  three  third  party  methods: — i.   Fusion 

2.  Menace.  3.  Participation  in  government.  Development  of 
opinion  as  to  compromise;  the  Wisconsin  movement;  constructivist 
and  revolutionist  tactics. 

XIV.  Divisions  among  American  Socialists  .      22 1 

Shades  of  difference  rather  than  factions  in  the  Socialist  Party:  — 
Marxist  and  Revisionist;  Christian  Socialist;  proletarian,  intel- 
lectual, and  "parlor"  Socialist;  industrial  and  craft  unionism; 
Labor  Party  controversy;  differences  as  to  tactics;  constructivist 
and  revolutionist;  the  right  and  the  left. 


X  CONTENTS 

XV.  The  Present  Status  of  Socialism  in  the  United 
States 241 

Slow  growth  as  compared  with  European  Socialism;  non-party 
Socialist  sympathizers.  Elements  of  weakness:  non-voting  mem- 
bers; circumstances  of  American  society;  state  of  organized  labor; 
conditions  within  the  Socialist  parties;  cumbersome  organ- 
ization; occasional  sectarianism;  requirement  of  pledge;  divisions 
in  Socialist  Party.  Elements  of  strength:  —  women  and  aliens  in 
party;  capacity  for  self-criticism;  substantial  unanimity  behind 
differences.  Summary  of  study:  —  inconsistencies  inherent  in  sub- 
ject; Marxian  theory  in  American  Socialism;  original  contri- 
butions to  theory;  the  ultimate  Socialist  program;  the  present 
trend  of  Socialist  writers;  the  Socialist  organization;  the  immediate 
demands;  tactics;  divisions.  The  Outlook:  —  Prognostication 
dangerous;  the  future  of  American  Socialism  dependent  upon 
economic  development;  changes  affecting  other  political  parties; 
policy  of  the  Socialist  parties;  attitude  of  cultural  institutions. 
Modem  Socialism  not  a  science,  but  a  popular  movement  toward 
a  definite  program. 


List  of  Publications 257 


INTRODUCTION 

In  the  following  pages  the  author,  Miss  Hughan, 
makes  what  I  venture  to  predict  will  be  widely  and 
generally  recognized  as  a  very  valuable  contribution 
to  the  literature  of  Socialism.  I  regard  it  as  a  privi- 
lege and  a  pleasure  to  recommend  it  to  all  those 
whose  interest  in  the  subject  has  led  them  to  the  point 
where  they  desire  a  handy  and  reliable  descriptive 
survey  of  the  organized  Socialist  movement  in  this 
country. 

In  view  of  the  phenomenal  growth  of  the  political 
Socialist  movement,  and  the  amazing  progress  of 
Socialist  sentiment  in  the  country,  it  is  remarkable 
that  no  such  survey  has  hitherto  existed  for  the  guid- 
ance of  the  American  student.  Quite  admirable  studies 
of  the  Socialist  movement  in  the  United  States 
have  been  written  by  foreign  writers  and  published 
for  European  readers.  Notable  among  such  studies 
are  those  by  the  German  writer,  A.  Sartorius  von 
Waltershausen,  and  the  Italian  writer,  S.  Cognetti 
de  Martiis.  A  quarter  of  a  century  has  elapsed 
since  Prof.  Richard  T.  Ely's  well  known  book,  *'  The 
Labor  Movement  in  America,"  appeared.  It  is, 
therefore,  quite  out  of  date,  and  useless  as  a  descrip- 
tion of  the  present-day  movement.  Professor  Ely's 
book  treated  of  the  American  labor  movement  in 
general,  and  not  of  Socialism  exclusively.    It  had  the 


2  INTRODUCTION 

great  merit,  however,  of  being  the  first  attempt  to 
give  an  intelligent  and  reliable  sketch  of  the  history 
of  Socialism  in  this  country.  In  the  modern  Socialist 
library  its  place  has  been  taken  by  my  friend  Mr. 
Hillquit's  scholarly  "  History  of  Socialism  in  the 
United  States." 

The  value  of  Mr.  Hillquit's  work  to  the  student 
of  American  Socialism  cannot  be  overestimated.  It 
is  indispensable.  But  it  is  not,  and  was  not  intended 
to  be,  a  survey  of  the  contemporary  Socialist  move- 
ment. The  reader  seeking  a  descriptive  account  of 
the  movement,  the  political  organization  and  its 
many  tributaries,  a  guide  book  enabling  him  to  under- 
stand the  methods  of  the  Socialists,  their  numerous 
controversies  and  divisions,  has  hitherto  sought  in 
vain. 

This,  then,  is  the  gap  in  the  literature  of  Social- 
ism which  Miss  Hughan's  book  is  intended  to  fill. 
Her  warm  sympathy  so  finely  tempered  by  her  critical 
spirit,  enabling  her  to  see  both  the  noble  and  the  ig- 
noble in  just  perspective,  makes  her  a  trustworthy 
guide  through  the  labyrinthian  paths  which  confront 
the  serious  student  of  American  Socialism  as  it  is 
to-day.  She  gives  a  bird's-eye  view  of  the  movement, 
sketches  the  political  organization,  noting  its  weak 
points  as  well  as  its  strong  ones;  problems  in  theory 
and  tactics  are  discussed  with  candor  and  discrimina- 
tion, and  the  position  of  the  leading  spokesmen  of 
the  movement  stated  in  their  own  words  or  impartial 
condensations  of  them.  Thus  the  student  who  wants 
to  understand  the  issues  involved  in  the  constant  and 
often  bitter  conflict  that  is  being  waged  between  the 
so-called  **  Opportunist  Socialist,"  on  the  one  hand, 
and  the  so-called  "  Revolutionary  Socialist,"  upon 


INTRODUCTION  3 

the  other  hand,  is  now  provided  with  a  convenient 
conspectus  of  the  entire  field  of  controversy. 

While  she  has  been  remarkably  successful  in  her. 
effort  to  be  impartial,  it  is  very  evident  that  Miss 
Hughan's  sympathies  are,  upon  the  whole,  with  the 
"  Opportunists  "  rather  than  with  the  "  Revolution- 
ists." I  use  these  unfortunate  and  misleading  terms 
in  the  sense  in  which  they  are  commonly  used  in  con- 
temporary Socialist  discussion,  as  described  in  the  fol- 
lowing pages,  because  they  are  so  used,  and  not  to 
endorse  them.  If  by  social  revolution  is  meant  a  re- 
ality, rather  than  an  abstract  phrase,  the  "Opportun- 
ist "  who  works  for  some  specific  measure  for  the  ad- 
vancement of  the  workers'  interests  is  a  better  "  Rev- 
olutionist "  than  he  who,  calling  himself  a  *'  Revolu- 
tionist "  and  using  the  term  "  Opportunist "  to  ex- 
press contempt,  shouts  terrible  phrases  but  declines 
to  participate  in  the  attempt  to  bring  about  the  im- 
provement of  the  lot  of  the  workers  because  the  spe- 
cific measure  aimed  at  will  not,  of  itself,  inaugurate 
the  Cooperative  Commonwealth. 

It  is  hardly  to  be  expected,  therefore,  that  either 
the  book  itself  or  its  author  will  completely  escape 
Socialist  criticism.  I  am  satisfied,  however,  that  the 
book  will  be  welcomed  by  an  overwhelming  majority 
of  the  organized  Socialists  in  the  United  States,  and 
accepted  as  a  faithful  picture  of  the  movement  at 
this  time  of  transition.  Without  assuming  responsi- 
bility for  all  Miss  Hughan's  opinions,  I  have  no  hesi- 
tation in  saying  that  I  have  found  the  book  reliable 
and  illuminating,  and  that  I  regard  it  as  a  trustworthy 
guide.  It  must  at  once  take  a  place  among  the 
books  that  are  really  indispensable  to  the  student  of 
Socialism. 


4  INTRODUCTION 

There  has  been  much  discussion  during  the  last 
few  years  concerning  the  alleged  decline  of  the  in- 
fluence of  Marxian  teachings  upon  the  American 
Socialist  movement.  To  that  discussion  the  pres- 
ent volume  is  a  noteworthy  contribution.  It  brings 
into  bold  relief  the  fact  that,  while  the  movement  is 
undoubtedly  losing  its  dogmatic  and  sectarian  char- 
acter —  imposed  upon  it,  quite  naturally,  and  unin- 
tentionally, by  the  German  exiles  who  first  propa- 
gated the  teachings  of  Marx  in  this  country  —  in  its 
practice  it  is,  through  that  very  fact,  becoming  ever 
more  Marxian  in  the  sense  that  it  follows  the  prac- 
tical example  of  Marx  himself. 

It  is  my  earnest  hope  that  the  book  will  command 
the  large  interest  and  circulation  it  merits.  It  will 
do  much  to  promote  an  intelligent  study  of  Socialism, 
and  free  the  discussion  of  the  subject  from  prejudice 
and  the  bitterness  and  misunderstanding  which  prej- 
udice engenders. 

John  Spargo. 

•^Nestledown," 

Old  Bennington,  Vermonti 
Endof  Apnl,  191 1. 


AMERICAN   SOCIALISM   OF   THE 
PRESENT   DAY 


AMERICAN  SOCIALISM  OF 
THE  PRESENT  DAY 

CHAPTER   I 

INTRODUCTORY 

That  Socialism  is  a  force  to  be  reckoned  with  is 
already  a  platitude.  In  England  it  Is  now,  through 
the  Labor  Party,  a  factor  in  Parliament ;  in  Belgium 
it  is  leading  the  people  through  the  cooperative  as- 
sociations ;  in  France  ^  it  has  gained  control  over 
several  important  municipalities,  and  in  Germany  it 
is  the  faith  of  the  party  numerically  strongest  in  the 
empire.^ 

Until  seven  years  ago  few  Americans  would  ac- 
knowledge the  presence  of  Socialism  as  an  active 
force  In  this  country.  In  1904,  however,  we  awoke 
to  the  realization  that  the  Socialist  Party  vote 
(409,230)  had  increased  more  than  300%  since 
the  previous  election  (96,931  In  1900).^  That  this 
gain  was  largely  adventitious  and  due  to  the  con- 
servative character  of  the  Democratic  presidential 
candidate  for  that  year  was  shown  by  the  very  slight 
increase  recorded  in  1908;  yet  the  mere  maintenance 
of  Its  strength  In  the  latter  campaign  (424,483)^ 
indicates  that  the  Socialist  Party  of  America  had 

^  A.  M.  Simons,  Socialism  in  French  Municipalities,  p.  7,  seq. 
*  Hillquit,  Socialism  in  Theory  and  Practice,  p.  337. 
»  S.  P.  Official  Bulletin,  May,  1909. 


8  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

grown  from  a  chance  aggregation  of  the  discon- 
tented into  a  permanent  body.  The  local  elections 
of  1909  showed  in  most  cases  a  falling  off  from  these 
figures;  but  in  1910  the  sweeping  Socialist  victories 
in  Milwaukee  were  followed  by  a  national  vote  of 
604,756,^  with  the  election  of  the  first  Socialist,  Vic- 
tor Berger,  of  Wisconsin,  to  the  Congress  of  the 
United  States. 

An  even  surer  criterion  of  strength  than  the  official 
vote  is  given  in  the  dues-paying  membership  of  the 
party,  which  increased  from  about  20,000  in  1903  - 
to  41,479  in  1909,^  rising  in  1910  to  58,011,  a  gain 
in  one  year  of  nearly  40%.^ 

Although  few  of  us  would  state  with  President 
Hadley*^  that  Socialist  views  "  are  held  to  a  greater 
or  less  extent  by  a  large  number  of  people,  —  per- 
haps a  majority  of  voters  in  the  United  States,"  — 
it  is  patent  to  all  that  each  year  shows  the  steady 
spread  of  views  now  denominated  as  Socialist,  as 
well  as  the  entrenchment  in  hitherto  conservative 
quarters  of  policies  but  lately  classed  under  the  So- 
cialist category. 

When  we  of  America  inquire,  however,  "  What 
is  Socialism?  "  we  are  confronted  by  a  chaos  of  con- 
flicting definitions.  The  word  Socialist  is  applied 
indiscriminately  to  Roosevelt,  Bryan,  and  Hearst, 
to  the  Western  Federation  of  Miners,  and  to  the 
over-sentimental   Christian   moralist. 

In  England  the  working-class  movement  has 
sprung  up  spontaneously  as  the  outcome  of  imme- 
diate necessities,  and  has  hitherto  borne  but  slight 

*  Thompson,  The  Rising  Tide  of  SociaHsm,'p.  I. 

*  Hillquit,  History  of  Socialism,  p.  347. 

*  S.  P.  Official  Bulletin,  February,  1910. 

*  S.  P.  National  Bulletin,  January,  191 1. 

»  Hadley,  Education  of  the  American  Citizen,  p.  $8. 


OF  THE   PRESENT   DAY  9 

relation  to  any  self-conscious  economic  philosophy. 
The  name  Socialism,  accordingly,  is  comparatively 
little  used.  It  appears  as  an  official  title  only  in  the 
Social-Democratic  Party,  and,  while  the  Independent 
Labor  Party  is  avowedly  Socialist,  its  political  ac- 
tivity, as  well  as  that  of  the  Fabian  Society,  is 
merged  in  that  of  the  Labor  Party.  The  tendency 
of  English  Socialism  is,  accordingly,  to  lay  little 
stress  upon  party  labels,  and  to  discuss  measures 
rather  than  systems. 

On  the  continent  of  Europe,  on  the  other  hand, 
the  philosophy  of  Socialism  is,  in  most  cases,  older 
than  the  prevailing  system  of  government.  The 
theories  promulgated  by  Marx  and  Engels  have 
had  sixty  years  of  direct  influence  during  which  points 
of  controversy  might  be  threshed  out,  organization 
and  tactics  crystallized,  and  a  scientific  doctrine 
evolved. 

In  the  United  States  there  has  been  no  continu- 
ous evolution  of  either  measures  or  doctrine.  The 
continental  Socialism  of  the  seventies,  brought  over 
by  German  immigrants,  has  had  to  be  adapted 
to  political,  social,  and  economic  conditions  dif- 
fering widely  from  those  from  which  it  sprang.  As 
a  result,  there  was  until  1892  nothing  that  could 
properly  be  called  an  American  Socialist  party,  and 
even  now  the  current  saying  that  Socialists  are  "  of 
57  varieties  "  reflects  the  prevalent  impression,  both 
popular  and  academic,  as  to  American  Socialism. 

The  question  before  us,  then,  is,  first  of  all, — 
Does  there  exist,  or  to  what  extent  does  there  exist,  a 
consistent  Socialist  movement  in  the  United  States? 
Only  after  such  a  movement  is  clearly  identified  can 
we  proceed  to  inquire,  —  What  are  its  principles  and 


lo  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

tactics,  Its  strength  and  Its  weakness,  at  the  present 
time? 

The  Socialist  parties  of  the  world  have  main- 
tained since  1900  an  International  Socialist  Bureau, 
composed  of  two  representatives  of  the  organized 
movement  in  each  affiliated  country.^  There  are 
two  American  organizations  represented  in  this 
Bureau,  the  Socialist  Party  and  the  Socialist  Labor 
Party.  Since  both  bodies  have  thus  at  present  an 
accredited  place  in  the  Socialist  movement  of  the 
world,  they  must  be  taken,  through  their  official 
utterances,  as  the  spokesmen  of  American  Socialism. 
The  Socialist  Party  received  in  1908  a  vote  of 
424,483,  as  compared  with  the  Socialist  Labor  Party 
vote  of  about  15,000,  the  latter  having  fallen  to  this 
figure  from  82,204  in  1898.^  As  it  is  evident  that 
the  Socialist  Party  represents  the  majority  of  Ameri- 
can Socialists,  its  utterances  will,  in  general,  be  taken 
as  typical,  mention  being  made  of  the  Socialist 
Labor  Party  only  in  matters  wherein  the  two  differ 
materially. 

First  of  such  utterances  are  the  national,  state,  and 
municipal  platforms,  which  are  deliberate  declara- 
tions of  principle,  adopted  by  a  convention  of  elected 
delegates  and  confirmed  by  referendum  of  the  party. 
While  the  authority  of  a  platform  would  at  first  sight 
appear  conclusive  on  a  given  point,  it  must  be  re- 
membered, on  the  other  hand,  that  the  platform  is 
confessedly  a  campaign  document  designed  for  the 
conversion  of  the  public.  As  far  as  may  be  possible, 
we  must  interpret  such  authorities  by  the  declarations 
of  Socialists  among  themselves  and  their  methods 

*  Hillquit,  Socialism  in  Theory  and  Practice,  p.  355. 

•  Hillquit,  History  of  Socialism,  p.  340. 


OF  THE   PRESENT   DAY  ii 

when  outside  the  Hme-Hght  of  the  campaign.  A  sec- 
ond and  most  important  source  of  information,  ac- 
cordingly, is  afforded  by  the  private  official  literature 
of  the  party.  This  consists  of,  first,  the  weekly  bulle- 
tin furnished  to  members  of  the  National  Committee 
and  containing  the  discussions  of  that  body,  second, 
the  Monthly  Bulletin,  issued  since  1904  without  ex- 
pense to  members  of  the  party,  and,  third,  such  occa- 
sional publications  as  may  be  issued  by  the  authority 
of  the  organization. 

Besides  the  distinctly  official  sources  mentioned, 
careful  account  must  be  taken  of  the  utterances  of  the 
Socialist  press,  of  the  books  circulated  by  the  party, 
and  the  party  leaders.  A  word  is  necessary  regard- 
ing these  classifications. 

Although  the  Socialist  Labor  Party  possesses  an 
official  daily.  The  People,  of  New  York,  the  Socialist 
Party  has  refused  to  designate  any  organ  aside  from 
its  own  bulletin.^  The  party  has  at  different  times 
given  definite  support  to  the  New  York  Call,  Chicago 
Daily  Socialist,  and  Milwaukee  Social-Democratic 
Herald.^  Says  the  National  Secretary  of  the  party, 
however,  "  The  only  thing  that  would  stand  abso- 
lutely to  the  test  as  an  official  utterance  of  the  party 
is  the  constitution,  the  platform,  and  such  resolu- 
tions as  are  finally  adopted  by  national  party 
referendum." 

As  the  category  of  Socialist  books  Is  proverbially 
an  elusive  one,  I  will  quote  chiefly  from  the  list  rec- 
ommended in  the  study  course  of  the  National 
Executive  Committee.^    To  these  may  be  added  the 

»  S.  p.  Nat.  Const.,  Art.  V.  Sec.  2. 
*  Nat.  Weekly  Bu-Uetin,  Mar.  7,  July  23,  1907. 
'  Books  recommended  by   the    Nat.    Exec.    Committee:    Theory — ■ 
Socialism  in  Theory  and  Practice,  Hillquit;  Social  Revolution,  Kautsky; 


12  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

writings  of  the  party  leaders  in  general,  and,  if  we 
wish  to  take  a  wider  sweep,  the  books  published  and 
widely  advertised  by  the  Socialist  cooperative  pub- 
lishing house  of  C.  H.  Kerr  and  Company,  Chicago. 

The  acknowledgment  of  leadership  is  foreign  to 
the  principles  of  Socialism,  which  emphasizes  the 
class  rather  than  the  individual,  and  economic  rather 
than  personal  forces.  Such  hero  worship  as  that 
of  Lassalle  by  the  German  workers  of  the  last  gen- 
eration is  repudiated  by  American  Socialists;  and 
many  of  the  internal  polemics  which  appear  to  out- 
siders as  serious  dissensions  are  in  reality  merely  a 
rough  discipline  administered  to  would-be  leaders 
who  forget  their  place  as  servants  of  the  organiza- 
tion. The  phenomenon  of  **  personal  following," 
conspicuous  in  the  Socialist  Labor  Party,  is  rare  in 
the  Socialist  Party,  in  which  such  men  as  Berger, 
Debs,  and  Hillquit  are  utilized  by  the  same  constit- 
uencies as  organizer,  agitator,  or  theoretician,  ac- 
cording to  their  respective  abilities. 

Even  with  these  reservations,  the  task  of  naming 
the  party  leaders  is  obviously  not  a  matter  for 
personal  judgment.  The  Socialist  is  unavoidably 
biassed  by  local  prejudice  or  his  own  position 
towards  party  tactics;  the  non-Socialist  can  hardly 
keep  from  taking  as  representative  those  Socialists 
who  may  either  give  consistency  to  a  preconceived 
idea  of  the  party  or  who  happen  to  have  challenged 

Economic  Foundations  of  Society,  Loria.  The  Development  of  Socialism  — 
Socialism,  Utopian  and  Scientific,  Engels.  Economics  —  The  People's 
Marx,  Deville;  Socialism,  Spargo.  Special  Problems  of  Socialism  — 
Woman,  Bebel;  The  American  Farmer,  Simons;  The  City  for  the  People, 
Parsons;  Collectivism  and  Industrial  Evolution,  Vandcrvelde.  Tactics 
and  Methods  —  Socialists  at  Work,  Hunter;  Constructive  Socialism, 
Thompson.  History  —  History  of  Socialism,  Kirkup;  History  of  Social- 
ism in  the  United  States,  Hillquit.  (S.  P.  Official  Bulletin,  September, 
1909.) 


OF  THE   PRESENT    DAY  13 

his  attention  by  their  moderation  on  the  one  hand  or 
their  sensationalism  on  the  other.  The  object  of  the 
present  study,  however,  is  the  investigation  of  Ameri- 
can Socialism  as  an  actual  and  entire  movement,  sci- 
entific or  unscientific,  consistent  or  inconsistent,  as  it 
may  prove  to  be;  accordingly,  only  those  persons 
in  general  will  be  taken  as  party  spokesmen  who  have 
been  chosen  by  the  rank  and  file  as  their  representa- 
tives. These  will  include  in  the  present  inquiry  only 
those  rpcn  and  women  who  hold,  or  have  recently 
held,  the  highest  offices  voted  for  by  the  party, — 
namely,  the  seven  members  of  the  National  Execu- 
tive Committee,  the  National  Secretary,  the  Repre- 
sentatives in  the  International  Socialist  Bureau,  the 
candidates  for  President  and  Vice-President  of  the 
United  States,  and  the  National  Committeemen,  num- 
bering 69  in  1911.^  We  may  add  also  those  who 
hold  the  highest  public  offices  to  which  Socialists  have 
yet  been  elected,  those  of  State  Senator,  Mayor  of 
a  municipality,  and  U.  S.  Congressman.  It  must 
always  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  leaders  and  writers 
above  referred  to  are  only  the  mouthpieces  of  Ameri- 
can Socialists.  The  movement  is  of  the  working- 
class,  and  as  such  is  largely  inarticulate.  Its  candi- 
dates and  committeemen  are  seldom  typical  wage- 
earners,  but  rather  intellectual  proletarians  or  labor 
unionists  who  have  risen  out  of  the  ranks,  men  pos- 
sessing leisure  for  organizing  and  facilities  for  ex- 
pression. The  attitude  of  the  rank  and  file  itself  is 
registered  partly  by  its  choice  among  these  leaders, 
still  more  by  its  votes  on  individual  referendums  and 
local  decisions;  if  we  would  ascertain  even  more 
closely  this  point  of  view,  we  shall  have  to  venture 

»  S.  P.  Official  Bulletin,  January,  1911. 


14  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

on  the  always  doubtful  ground  of  personal  impres- 
sions, those  of  the  writer  gathered  from  public  and 
private  meetings  and  talks,  and  those  of  persons  of 
larger  experience  furnished  by  them  in  conversations 
and  correspondence.  Where  recourse  is  had  to  this 
method,  accuracy  is  not  pretended,  but,  here  as  else- 
where, impressions  must  sometimes  serve  to  supple- 
ment exact  observation. 

Scattered  over  the  country  are  numerous  non- 
official  Socialist  organizations,  —  represented  m  New 
York  by  the  Collectivist  Society,  the  Intercollegiate 
Socialist  Society,  the  Rand  School  of  Social  Science, 
and  the  Socialist  Sunday  Schools,  —  together  with 
such  labor  groups  as  the  Western  Federation  of 
Miners  and  the  Industrial  Workers  of  the  World, 
whose  Socialist  sympathies  are  more  or  less  avowed. 
All  of  these  come  into  frequent  association  with  the 
Socialist  Party,  and  influence  and  are  influenced  by 
it.  As  much  may  also  be  said  of  many  foreign 
leaders  and  organizations,  and  of  American  Social- 
ists and  sympathizers  outside  the  party  lines. 

In  the  same  way  that  the  object  of  this  description 
forbids  the  placing  of  emphasis  upon  Socialist  party 
members,  perhaps  well-known  to  the  public,  who 
have  failed  to  attain  places  of  authority  by  the  vote 
of  the  party,  so  also  a  hiatus  may  be  noted  in  the 
passing  over  of  prominent  Socialists  who  are  as  yet 
unaffiliated  with  either  of  the  Socialist  parties.  The 
writer  is  quite  free  from  the  intention  of  disputing 
the  claim  of  the  latter  class  to  the  name  of  Socialists. 
Fortunately  for  the  present  investigation,  however, 
the  Socialist  Party  of  America  Is  a  very  definite  body, 
and,  if  we  would  avoid  the  vagueness  which  has  so 
often  defeated  similar  inquiry,  it  will  be  necessary 


OF  THE   PRESENT   DAY  15 

for  us  to  keep  to  its  boundaries,  referring  to  the  per- 
sons and  organizations  just  mentioned  only  in  so 
far  as  they  have  affected  the  position  of  the  party 
itself. 

The  present  essay  thus  becomes  largely  a  study  of 
the  Socialist  Party  of  America  at  the  present  time,  its 
official  literature,  its  organization  and  decisions,  and 
the  views  of  its  leaders  as  expressed  in  the  party 
press  and  elsewhere.  An  endeavor  will  be  made  to 
outline  the  belief,  demands,  and  methods  of  Ameri- 
can Socialism,  to  show  their  relation  to  the  theories 
of  Marx,  and  finally,  by  estimating  the  elements  of 
strength  and  weakness  in  the  movement,  to  ascertain 
its  status  at  present.  In  order  to  accomplish  this 
purpose,  there  is  need  to  precede  the  discussion  with 
a  brief  outline  of  scientific  or  Marxian  Socialism. 


CHAPTER    II 

OUTLINE   OF  MARXIAN   SOCIALISM 

The  definition  of  Socialism  is  a  rock  upon  which 
many  discussions  have  been  wrecked.  The  defects 
of  the  definitions  current  in  continental  Europe  have 
been  analyzed  by  Tugan-Baranowsky/  while  the 
attempts  of  English  economists  are  usually  inferior 
even  to  these.  Rae,  in  his  test  that  Socialism  always 
means  the  removal  of  one  injustice  by  the  infliction 
of  a  greater,-  and  Fawcett,  —  "  Probably  the  best 
definition  of  Socialism  is,  that  it  enables  a  man  to 
rely  upon  a  society  or  a  community  for  maintenance 
instead  of  upon  his  own  individual  efforts,"  ^  may  be 
charged  by  Socialists  with  begging  the  question. 
When  Cairnes  calls  it  the  invocation  of  state  power 
for  instant  accomplishment  of  ideal  schemes,^  the 
Socialist  repudiates  this  characterization  also  on  the 
ground  that  instant  accomplishment  is  not  essential 
to  Socialism,  and  that  it  contemplates  no  ideal 
scheme,  but  an  outcome  of  evolutionary  forces. 

The  only  fair  method  in  examining  a  belief  or 
policy  is  to  accept  the  definition  of  its  supporters; 
if  other  beliefs  or  practices  can  be  proved  necessary 
corollaries,  or  if  the  avowed  adherents  fail  to  live 

*  Der  Moderne  Sozialismus,  p.  I,  Sfq. 

*  Contemporary  Socialism,  p.  9;   see  also  p.  Ii,  13,  14. 
»  Op.  cit.,  p.  105.  *  Op.  cit.,  p.  316,  note. 


AMERICAN   SOCIALISM  17 

up  to  their  official  doctrines,  these  points  must  be 
noticed  later.  For  practical  purposes  then  we  may 
take  the  definition  of  the  American  Socialists  as  ex- 
pressed by  Morris  Hillquit: 

"  Socialism  advocates  the  transfer  of  ownership 
in  the  social  tools  of  production  —  the  land,  fac- 
tories, machinery,  railroads,  mines,  etc.  —  from  the 
individual  capitalist  to  the  people,  to  be  operated  for 
the  benefit  of  all."  ^ 

While  Socialism  proper  Is  synonymous  with  the 
economic  and  political  program  indicated  above.  It 
may  be  completely  understood  only  when  viewed  in 
its  broader  sense,  as,  first,  an  economic  belief,  second, 
a  plan  or  prophecy  for  a  future  commonwealth,  and, 
third,  a  working  method  for  the  attainment  of  this 
commonwealth. 

To  the  Utopians  of  the  early  nineteenth  century 
belongs  the  credit  or  discredit  of  founding  Socialism 
as  a  humanitarian  movement,  but  modern  Socialists 
claim  that  only  with  the  work  of  Karl  Marx  and 
Frederick  Engels  In  the  forties  did  Socialism  become 
a  scientific  and  consistent  world  movement.  The 
utterances  of  these  two  pioneers,  especially  as  ex- 
pressed in  their  joint  Communist  Manifesto  and  in 
Marx's  Capital,  have  for  a  half-century  formed  the 
Socialist  "  guide  of  faith  and  practice."  In  recent 
years  the  Revisionists  have  suggested  modifications 
of  these  doctrines,  but  still.  In  the  words  of  Professor 
Veblen,  "  The  socialism  that  Inspires  hopes  and  fears 
to-day  is  of  the  school  of  Marx.  No  one  is  seriously 
apprehensive  of  any  other  so-called  socialistic  move- 
ment, and  no  one  is  seriously  concerned  to  criticise 

*  Socialism  in  Theory  and  Practice,  p.  ii. 


1 8  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

or  refute  the  doctrines  set  forth  by  any  other  school 
of  socialists."  ^ 

The  Marxian  doctrine  includes  a  theory  of  history 
and  a  system  of  pure  economics,  with  deductions 
from  both  as  to  the  present  state  of  society.  These 
two  may  stand  or  fall  separately,  as  there  is  nothing 
in  common  between  them  except  that  Marx  hap- 
pened to  originate  both.^ 

The  first  of  these,  the  theory  of  the  economic  in- 
terpretation of  history,  is  stated  thus  by  Engels : 

"  In  every  historical  epoch,  the  prevailing  mode 
of  economic  production  and  exchange,  and  the  social 
organization  necessarily  following  from  it,  form 
the  basis  upon  which  is  built  up,  and  from  which 
alone  can  be  explained,  the  political  and  intellectual 
history  of  that  epoch."  ^ 

As  Engels  does  not  fail  to  state,  the  proposition 
was  originally  formulated  by  Marx.  A  portion  of 
Marx's  explanation  is  here  given: * 

"  In  the  social  production  which  men  carry  on, 
they  enter  into  definite  relations  that  are  indispen- 
sable and  independent  of  their  will;  these  relations 
of  production  correspond  to  a  definite  stage  of  devel- 
opment of  their  material  powers  of  production.  The 
sum  total  of  these  relations  of  production  constitutes 
the  economic  structure  of  society  —  the  real  founda- 
tion, on  which  rise  legal  and  political  superstructures, 
and  to  which  correspond  definite  forms  of  social  con- 
sciousness.   The  mode  of  production  in  material  life 

*  Quarterly  Journal  of  Economics,  Vol.  21,  p.  299-300. 

*  Seligman,  Economic  Interpretation  of  History,  p.  105. 

*  Com.  Manifesto,  p.  6. 

*  Contribution  to  Critique  of  Pol.  Econ.,  p.  11-12. 


OF  THE   PRESENT   DAY  19 

determines  the  general  character  of  the  social,  politi- 
cal, and  spiritual  processes  of  life.  It  is  not  the  con- 
sciousness of  men  that  determines  their  existence, 
but,  on  the  contrary,  their  social  existence  determines 
their  consciousness.  .  .  .  No  social  order  ever  dis- 
appears before  all  the  productive  forces,  for  which 
there  is  room  in  it,  have  been  developed;  and  new 
higher  relations  of  production  never  appear  before 
the  material  conditions  of  their  existence  have  ma- 
tured in  the  womb  of  the  old  society." 

The  economic  interpretation  of  history  becomes 
a  Socialist  doctrine  when  it  is  applied  as  follows  to 
the  analysis  of  the  present  social  system. 

Ancient  and  mediaeval  society  were  the  outcome 
respectively  of  classical  and  feudal  economic  condi- 
tions. The  latter  regime  was  characterized  by  in- 
dividual production  on  a  small  scale,  usually  for  the 
immediate  consumption  of  the  producer  or  his  feu- 
dal lord,  but  with  the  beginning  of  commodity  pro- 
duction on  a  gradually  enlarging  basis.  '  As  the 
result  of  the  industrial  revolution,  the  mediaeval 
system  was  transformed  into  that  of  capitalism;  and 
the  bourgeois  or  capitalist  structure  of  society  now 
appeared,  with  the  consequent  institutions  of  the 
bourgeois  state,  church,  family,  and  moral  code. 

As  machine  industry  develops  in  bourgeois  society, 
the  means  of  production,  being  now  concentrated  into 
great  factories,  become  no  longer  individual,  but 
social  in  character,  and  production  is  now  a  social 
act.  The  new  relations  of  production  thus  brought 
about  constitute  the  economic  structure  of  society, 
upon  which  must  rise  its  political  and  legal  super- 
structures; accordingly  our  government  and  laws 
must  inevitably  be  modified  in  harmony  with  the 


20  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

social  mode  of  production,  —  that  is  in  the  direction 
of  the  next,  or  Socialist  form  of  society. 

After  the  economic  interpretation  of  history  has 
thus  been  applied  to  a  prophecy  of  Socialism,  Engels 
employs  the  dialectic  method  in  an  analysis  of  the 
contradictions  in  the  capitalist  system  by  which  the 
new  society  is  to  be  evolved. 

While  the  present  mode  of  production  is  becoming 
more  and  more  social  in  character,  the  mode  of  ex- 
change, being  still  based  upon  the  forms  of  appro- 
priation of  the  previous  system,  is  individual  in 
nature.  The  capitalist,  as  the  owner  of  the  means 
of  production,  still  appropriates  the  products  as  com- 
modities. There  is  thus  a  fundamental  contradiction 
in  industry,  in  that  the  social  product  is  appropriated 
by  the  individual  capitalist.^ 

Furthermore,  while  the  form  of  appropriation 
remains  the  same  as  in  mediaeval  society,  its  charac- 
ter has  changed  materially,  since  the  owner  of  the 
means  of  production  has  the  title  to  what  is  no  longer 
his  own  individual  product,  but  the  product  of  others, 
the  wage-laborers  whom  he  has  hired.  An  antago- 
nism thus  arises  between  the  proletariat  and  the 
capitalist  class,  which  constitutes  the  modern  mani- 
festation of  the  class  struggle,  that  conflict  which  has 
furnished  the  moving  force  of  all  recorded  history. 

As  industry  progresses,  capitalists  are  compelled 
by  competition  to  introduce  labor-saving  machinery, 
throwing  out  of  employment  more  and  more  wage- 
earners.  Those  laborers  who  are  unable  to  make 
the  new  adaptation  or  who  cannot  be  absorbed  to 
supply  the  resulting  demand  for  a  cheapened  product 
tend  to  form  an  industrial  reserve  army,  which  fur- 

*  Engels,  Socialism,  Utopian  and  Scientific,  p.  55,  83,  etc. 


OF  THE   PRESENT   DAY  21 

nishes  to  the  capitalist  a  force  to  be  drawn  upon  in 
busy  seasons,  as  well  as  a  weapon  for  keeping  down 
to  a  low  level  the  wages  of  the  actual  workers.  The 
power  of  capital  thus  increases  with  the  development 
of  technical  production,  while  the  lot  of  the  worker 
becomes  more  and  more  unbearable  because  of  his 
growing  dependence  upon  capital  and  the  increasing 
exploitation  which,  even  under  conditions  of  rising 
wages,  serves  to  widen  the  social  gulf  between  the 
two  classes.^  Thus  the  class  struggle  grows  ever 
more  intense,  and  "  what  the  bourgeoisie  produces, 
above  all,  are  its  own  grave-diggers."  ^ 

The  necessity  of  continually  increasing  production 
under  the  capitalist  system,  coupled  with  the  contra- 
diction between  social  production  and  individual  ap- 
propriation, brings  about  a  constant  tendency  to 
plethora,  which  the  bourgeoisie  seek  to  meet  by  an 
extension  of  markets.  Owing  to  the  limitations  of 
this  remedy  and  to  the  anarchy  of  production  that  is 
essential  to  the  capitalist  system,  the  plethora  as- 
sumes the  form  of  the  industrial  crisis,  occurring 
periodically,  during  which  ^  "  the  mode  of  production 
is  in  rebellion  against  the  mode  of  exchange." 

At  each  crisis  the  industrial  structure  is  strained 
more  seriously,  with  the  result  that  the  capitalist 
class  is  forced  gradually  to  recognize  the  social  char- 
acter of  production  by  the  concentration  of  industry 
in  the  trust  and  finally  the  state-owned  enterprise. 
The  functions  of  the  bourgeoisie  being  now  per- 
formed by  salaried  employes.  It  becomes  a  super- 
fluous class. 

As  the  contradiction  between  socialized  produc- 

*  Marx,  Wage-Labor  and  Capital,  p.  24. 

*  Communist  Manifesto,  p.  23.  '  Engels,  op.  cit.,  p.  65. 


22  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

tion  and  individual  ownership  tends  on  the  one  hand 
to  range  the  exploited  proletariat  in  an  ever  fiercer 
class  struggle  against  the  exploiting  capitalists,  and 
on  the  other  to  force  the  complete  socialization  of 
industry  in  the  trust  and  government  ownership,  the 
contradiction  at  last  brings  forth  its  own  solution, 
in  the  seizure  of  public  power  by  the  proletariat  and 
the  transformation  of  the  means  of  production  at 
their  hands  into  public  property.^ 

The  foregoing  brief  outline  contains  the  three  car- 
dinal points  of  scientific  socialism,  namely,  —  the 
economic  interpretation  of  history,  the  class  struggle, 
and  the  inevitable  break-down  of  capitalism.  If  we 
add  to  these  the  contention,  shared  in  some  degree 
by  all  reformers,  that  existing  society  contains  within 
itself  serious  evils,  we  have  the  essentials  of  the 
Marxian  belief. 

The  theory  of  pure  economics,  which  Marx 
worked  out  in  Capital  and  employed  to  support  the 
conclusions  of  his  interpretation  of  history,  has  been 
taken  by  many  critics  as  the  scientific  foundation  of 
Socialism.  That  it  should  be  regarded  merely  as  sup- 
plementary, however,  and  as  a  contribution  of  Marx 
the  scholar  rather  than  Marx  the  revolutionist,  is 
shown  by  the  fact  that  long  before  the  publication 
of  Capital  (1867)  or  of  the  Contribution  to  the 
Critique  of  Political  Economy  (1859)  the  Socialist 
movement  had  become  articulate  in  the  Communist 
Manifesto  (1848)  which  makes  no  mention  of  the 
surplus  value  theory,  but  stands  squarely  upon  the 
economic  interpretation  of  history  and  the  class 
struggle.^     "  Marx  never  based  his  communistic  de- 

1  En^els,  op.  cit.,  p.  86. 

*  Licbknccht,  Karl  Marx,  p.  25,  33,  38. 


OF  THE   PRESENT   DAY  23 

mands  upon  this  argument,*  but  upon  the  Inevitable 
breakdown  of  capitalist  production." 

The  doctrine  of  surplus  value,  by  which  Marx 
works  out  deductively  the  conclusions  as  to  capitalist 
production  drawn  elsewhere  from  historical  inter- 
pretation, is  based  logically  upon  the  explicit  and 
implicit  teachings  of  Smith,  Malthus,  and  Ricardo, 
more  particularly  the  labor  theory  of  value  put  forth 
by  the  writer  last  named.  Marx  makes  frequent 
reference  to  these  authors,  as  well  as  to  Petty  and 
other  economists  Immediately  preceding  them,  and 
vigorously  criticises  Ricardo's  writings  regarding  cer- 
tain metaphysical  distinctions.^ 

Value,  according  to  Capital,  Is  the  crystallization 
of  labor,  and  the  value  embodied  In  an  article  Is  the 
exact  equivalent  of  the  labor  It  represents.  Here 
Is  meant  not  the  labor  of  a  particular  individual,  as 
that  may  be  feeble  or  otherwise  unproductive,  but 
*'  socially  necessary  "  labor,  —  namely,  the  average 
human  labor  required  to  reproduce  the  article  at  the 
given  time  and  place.^  Wealth  Is  that  which  has 
value,  but  capital  Is  wealth  used  in  the  production  of 
more  wealth  only  In  a  special  sense,  as  will  be  seen 
later.  Capital  creates  nothing  of  Itself,  for  all 
It  can  do  is  to  be  exchanged  or  converted  into 
machinery,  raw  material,  and  other  aids  to  Industry. 
In  the  former  case,  an  equivalent  Is  always  rendered 
In  an  honest  transaction,  and  so  no  value  Is  added. 
In  the  latter,  the  value  of  the  capital  goes  over  Into 
that  of  the  machinery,  which  in  turn  Is  transferred 
eventually  to  the  product;  but,  as  It  can  give  no  more 

*  Engels,  Preface  to  Marx's  Das  Elend  der  Philosophic,  p.  x. 
'  Capital,  Vol.  I.  p.  14,  note;  p.  19,  note;  p.  52,  notes,  etc. 
»  Ibid.,  p.  6. 


24  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

value  than  the  equivalent  of  the  labor  contained  in  it, 
its  productivity  then  ceases,  all  further  increase  being 
due  to  labor  alone. ^  Thus  labor  is  rendered  more 
efficient  by  the  means  of  production.  It  is  only  in 
a  roundabout  way  that  capital  brings  wealth  to  its 
owner,  namely,  by  being  used  to  hire  the  labor-power 
of  others. 

As,  owing  to  various  causes  detailed  in  the  histori- 
cal chapters  of  Capital,  there  are  in  modern  society 
numbers  of  people  forming  the  proletariat,  a  class 
without  the  necessary  land,  tools,  and  materials  for 
production,  forced  to  sell  their  labor-power  for  the 
means  of  subsistence,  the  capitalist  can  employ  his 
wealth  most  advantageously.^  First  he  buys  with 
it  the  labor-power  of  certain  workers;  this  labor- 
power  being  a  commodity.  Its  value  is  an  equivalent 
for  the  socially  necessary  labor  required  to  reproduce 
it,  the  value,  that  Is,  of  the  lowest  means  of  sub- 
sistence on  which  the  worker  will  consent  to  live 
and  bring  up  children  to  replace  himself.^  At  this 
price,  therefore,  it  is  bought  by  the  employer.  If 
the  full  working  time  of  a  laborer  were  needed  to 
produce  the  livelihood  for  himself  and  family,  all 
would  be  simple;  the  value  of  his  labor-power  would 
go  over  into  the  product,  the  capitalist  would  sell  it 
and  recover  his  capital,  but  no  profit  would  be  made.* 
Another  circumstance,  however,  enters  in.  Owing 
to  superior  organization  of  labor,  time-saving  inven- 

^  Capital,  Vol.  I.  p.  l86;  Le  Rossignol  inaccurately  employs  the  point 
concerning  exchange  as  a  refutation  of  Marx,  by  stating  that  commerce 
does  not  create  surplus  value  (Orthodox  Socialism,  p.  32);  and  even  Hadley 
seems  rather  to  follow  the  interpretation  of  Untermann  than  Marx  him- 
self in  the  statement,  "The  socialists  are  wrong  in  regarding  trade  as 
robbery"  (Economics,  p.  94,  96;  see  also  Untermann,  Marxian  Fxo- 
nomics,  p.  77).  *  Capital,  Vol.  I.  p.  91  (Humboldt  Ed.). 

*  Ibia.,  p.  92-93.  *  Ibid.,  p.  107. 


OF  THE   PRESENT   DAY  25 

tions,  and  chance  advantages,  the  subsistence  of  the 
working-class  family  can  usually  be  produced  in  less 
than  a  full  day;  Marx  takes  as  a  hypothesis  a  half- 
day.^  Instead  of  employing  the  worker  for  that  half- 
day,  however,  and  then  dismissing  him,  the  capitalist, 
who,  having  all  the  means  of  production,  can  dictate 
the  terms,  buys  his  labor-power  for  the  whole  work- 
ing-day. Thus,  after  the  laborer  has  replaced  the 
value  of  his  subsistence  in,  say,  five  hours,  and,  in 
perhaps  two  other  hours,  that  embodied  in  the  ma- 
terial and  tools,  he  works  yet  another  three  hours  to 
make  a  profit  for  the  capitalist.^ 

This  surplus  labor  time  is  the  sole  source  of  profit. 
Its  proportion  to  the  whole  labor  day  increases  grad- 
ually, as  improvement  cheapens  the  subsistence  of 
the  worker,  or  if,  as  sometimes  happens,  the  stan- 
dard at  which  the  laborer  will  consent  to  live  and 
replace  himself  is  lowered.  Furthermore,  the  em- 
ployer may  absolutely  increase  the  surplus  labor  time 
by  prolonging  the  labor  day,  or,  what  is  the  same 
thing,  speeding  up  the  machinery  and  the  worker. 
Again,  the  cost  of  subsistence  remaining  the  same, 
any  advantage  of  production  gained  in  a  special 
industry  or  establishment  will  directly  increase  the 
profits  in  question  until  competitors  shall  enjoy  the 
same  advantage,  since  the  average,  rather  than  the 
actual  labor  involved,  still  continues  to  measure  the 
specific  value  of  the  product.^  Thus  the  profit  of 
the  capitalist  is  solely  surplus  value  gained  by  the 
exploitation  of  the  worker;    and  capital,  in  the  So- 

*  Capital  (Humboldt  Edition),  Vol.  I.  p.  94.  '  Ibid.,  p.  icjg. 

•  Wage  Labor  and  Capital,  p.  25-26;  instead  of  directly  combating 
the  surplus  value  theory  here,  President  Hadley  takes  issue  with  the 
apparent  implication  that  inefficiency  tends  to  benefit  the  working  class 
(Economics,  p.  309). 


26  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

cialist  sense,  signifies  only  that  portion  of  wealth 
that  brings  gain  by  this  exploitation. 

"  Capital  is  not  a  mere  thing.  It  is  fundamen- 
tally an  economic  relationship  between  an  exploiting 
and  an  exploited  class."  ^ 

While  in  the  economic  interpretation  of  history 
as  outlined  by  Engels  the  crisis  is  ascribed  generally 
to  the  anarchy  of  capitalistic  production  and  to  the 
acceleration  of  industry  which  necessitates  expand- 
ing markets,  a  more  elaborate  special  cause  was 
worked  out  by  Rodbertus  and  a  little  later  by  Marx 
himself.^  As  industry  progresses,  the  cost  of  liv- 
ing tends  to  diminish,  and,  as  shown  above,  the 
actual  or  subsistence  rate  of  wages  tends  to  grow 
smaller;  moreover,  the  increasing  use  of  machinery, 
by  allowing  the  employment  of  women  and  children 
and  augmenting  the  reserve  army,  forces  actual 
wages  downward  toward  this  natural  level.  Accord- 
ingly, the  rate  of  surplus  value  increases;  wages  tend 
to  grow  proportionately  smaller,  and,  even  though 
the  rate  of  profit  may  decrease,  profits  as  a  whole  be- 
come proportionately  greater.  The  wage-earners, 
being  in  the  majority,  constitute  the  great  market  for 
the  product  of  industry,  but,  as  their  proportionate 
share  grows  smaller,  their  demand  must  decrease 
with  it.  As  the  small  body  of  capitalists,  on  the  other 
hand,  find  their  profits  increasing,  they  tend,  after  de- 
voting a  portion  to  articles  of  luxury,  to  reinvest  the 
surplus,  thus  producing  more  and  more  of  the  com- 
modities for  which  the  demand,  as  governed  by  the 
propertyless  masses,  is  decreasing.     This  over-pro- 

*  Untermann,  p.  28,  Marxian  Economics. 

'  Rodbertus,  op.  cit.,  p.  127  sfq.;  see  also  preface  by  John  B.  Clark, 
p.  9. 


OF  THE   PRESENT   DAY  27 

duction  and  under-consumptlon  can  end  only  in  an 
industrial  crisis,  which,  by  curtailing  production  for 
a  time,  allows  the  demand  slowly  to  overtake  the 
supply,  when  the  process  begins  again. ^ 

In  the  same  way  that  the  surplus  value  theory 
brings  support  to  the  doctrine  of  the  class  struggle 
by  showing  that  the  economic  interests  of  capitalist 
and  laborer  are  inherently  opposed,  the  Marxian 
theory  of  crises  gives  strength  to  the  expectation  of 
catastrophe  by  pointing  out  an  irresistible  force  under- 
mining the  structure  of  capitalist  world-industry.  The 
deductions  from  historical  interpretation,  accord- 
ingly, are  strongly  reenforced  by  those  of  Marx's 
pure  economics,  with  the  result  that,  although  the 
latter  is  but  an  unessential  accompaniment  of  scien- 
tific socialism,  this  movement  is  commonly  treated 
as  if  dependent  upon  Marx's  doctrine  in  toto  rather 
than  based,  as  it  actually  is,  upon  the  economic  inter- 
pretation of  history  with  its  Socialist  corollaries, 
the  class  struggle  and  the  downfall  of  bourgeois 
society. 

The  second  division  of  Socialist  doctrine  consists 
of  a  contemplated  reorganization  of  society  based 
on  the  collective  ownership  of  the  means  of  pro- 
duction, and  it  is  because  the  Socialists  of  the  world 
are  bending  their  efforts  to  the  ushering  in  of  this 
"cooperative  commonwealth"  that  Socialism  is  a 
present  political  issue.  The  one  basic  feature  of 
this  society  belongs  equally  to  the  platforms  of  all 
Socialists  and  may  be  taken  as  the  touchstone  of  So- 
cialism, —  namely,  the  destruction  of  exploitation  by 
the  collective  ownership  of  the  means  of  production, 
in  order  to  establish  a  more  equitable  enjoyment  of 
wealth.    By  Palgrave's  definition: 

*  Marx,  Wage-Labor  and  Capital,  p.  32. 


28  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

"  Socialism  implies  that  the  individuals  who  make 
up  society  should  in  their  collective  capacity  possess 
all  the  instruments  of  production  and  thus  prevent 
the  evils  arising  from  the  present  industrial  system,"  ^ 
and,  according  to  the  Encyclopedia  Britannica, 
*'  The  Socialists  propose  that  land  and  capital  .  .  . 
should  become  the  property  of  society  and  be  man- 
aged by  it  for  the  general  good."  ^ 

A  comprehensive  definition  is  Professor  Seager's, 

—  "  The  proposal  to  reorganize  industrial  society 
by  transferring  to  the  state,  or  its  agent,  the  govern- 
ment, control  over  land  and  the  instruments  of  pro- 
duction, which  we  have  called  capital  goods,  and  by 
confining  private  property  to  consumer's  goods."  ^ 

The  program  indicated  in  these  definitions,  and 
agreeing  substantially  with  that  of  Hillquit  previ- 
ously quoted,  constitutes  Socialism  proper,  and  its 
supporters,  irrespective  of  their  general  philosophy, 
are  Socialists. 

Karl  Marx  himself  dealt  with  this  program  in 
only  the  most  general  terms.  While  as  an  agitator 
and  organizer  he  entered  ardently  into  political  and 
economic  reform,  his  Socialist  philosophy  consisted 
in  an  analysis  of  what  is,  rather  than  a  theory  of  what 
ought  to  be;  and  the  Marxists  after  him  have  been 
not  so  much  reformers  propounding  schemes  for 
amelioration  as  analysts  of  existing  economic  ten- 
dencies and  organizers  of  the  proletariat  in  antici- 
pation of  the  inevitable  outcome. 

Instead  of  laying  down  specifications  for  a  future 

»  Op.  dt.,  Vol.  III.  p.  431.  «  Vol.  XXII.  p.  206. 

»  Introduction  to  Economics,  p.  528. 


OF   THE   PRESENT   DAY  29 

society,  accordingly,  the  Marxists  have  usually 
claimed  that  the  evolutionary  process  cannot  fail  to 
adapt  the  world  to  the  change  and  that  it  is  not  for 
one  generation  to  make  laws  for  the  state  of  pos- 
terity. Any  conceptions  of  the  Socialist  common- 
wealth in  which  they  indulge  are  confessedly  specu- 
lative and  provisional.  Furthermore,  Marx  dreams 
of  two  conditions  of  society,  one  for  immediate  adop- 
tion after  the  inevitable  revolution  and  another  to 
come  about  long  afterwards,  when  humanity  shall 
have  been  transformed  by  the  new  social  order.^ 

The  Communist  Manifesto  is  not  wholly  indefi- 
nite, however.  From  the  vague  and  revolutionary 
program  of  "  abolition  of  private  property  "  and  the 
conversion  of  capital  *'  into  common  property,  into 
the  property  of  all  members  of  society,"  it  goes  on  to 
the  statement  that  "  the  proletariat  will  use  its  politi- 
cal supremacy  to  wrest,  by  degrees,  all  capital  from 
the  bourgeoisie ;  to  centralize  all  instruments  of  pro- 
duction in  the  hands  of  the  state,  i.  e.,  of  the  proleta- 
riat organized  as  the  ruling  class ;  and  to  increase  the 
total  of  productive  forces  as  rapidly  as  possible."  ^ 

While  all  proposals  for  the  ultimate  Socialist  so- 
ciety other  than  these  broad  statements  are  regarded 
as  Utopian  on  the  ground  that  the  economic  condi- 
tions of  which  they  are  to  be  the  outcome  have  not 
yet  appeared,  the  same  criticism  does  not  apply  to 
the  "  immediate  demands  "  of  Socialism,  in  so  far  as 
these  are  dictated  by  forces  already  operative  in  in- 
dustry. The  Communist  Manifesto  therefore  lays 
down    as    measures    for    the    immediate    economic 


^  Marx,  On  the  Gotha  Program,  p.  649,  quoted  by  Skelton,  op.  cit. 
p.  202. 
*  Com.  Man.,  p.  24,  31. 


30  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

strengthening  of  the  working  class  the  confiscation  of 
rent  and  inheritances,  the  income  tax,  centralization 
of  credit,  communication,  and  transport,  equal  lia- 
bility of  all  to  labor,  extension  of  state  production, 
free  education,  and  the  abolition  of  child  labor.* 
While  this  first  sketch  of  modern  Socialist  demands 
leaves  much  to  be  inquired  after,  it  is  interesting 
to  note  how  generally  the  same  measures  are  in- 
cluded in  the  present  day  platforms. 

The  same  attitude  that  kept  the  pioneers  of  scien- 
tific socialism  from  supplying  details  of  the  new 
social  order  prevented  them  from  prescribing  rules 
for  its  attainment.  In  the  days  of  the  Manifesto, 
Marx  and  Engels  seemed  to  expect  a  violent  revo- 
lution on  the  occasion  of  the  final  overthrow  of 
capitalism;  yet  they  urged  the  Communists,  as  the 
Socialists  were  then  termed,  to  take  part  in  the  poli- 
tics of  their  various  countries,  supporting  "  every 
revolutionary  movement  against  the  existing  social 
and  political  order  of  things,"  —  in  France  the  So- 
cial Democrats  of  the  period,  in  Switzerland  the 
Radicals,  and  in  Germany  the  bourgeoisie  itself, 
"  whenever  it  acts  in  a  revolutionary  way  against  the 
absolute  monarchy,  the  feudal  oligarchy,  and  the 
petty  bourgeoisie."  ^ 

Later  on  these  writers  laid  less  and  less  stress 
upon  the  violence  of  the  revolution,  and  the  German 
leaders  of  the  seventies  and  eighties  conceived  their 
task  as  merely  to  "  agitate,  educate,  and  organize  " 
the  proletarian  forces  for  the  somewhat  indefinite 
crisis  before  them.^  For  a  long  period,  notwithstand- 
ing the  Communist  Manifesto,  political  activity  in 

>  Com.  Man.,  p.  32-33-  *  Ibid.,  p.  31,  45. 

*  Hunter,  Socialists  at  Work,  p.  154. 


OF  THE   PRESENT   DAY  31 

Germany,  the  seat  of  Marxism,  was  discouraged  as 
a  concession  to  the  ruling  aristocratic  state,  but  grad- 
ually the  organization  came  unavoidably  to  assume 
political  responsibilities,  and  since  1887  ^^^  Social- 
Democrats  of  Germany  have  played  a  greater  and 
greater  part  in  parliamentary  action.^  The  war-cry 
of  "  No  Compromise  "  has  for  many  years  been  the 
distinctive  sign  of  the  Marxist,  as  opposed  to  the 
Revisionist  and  Opportunist,  but  the  question  as  to 
what  constitutes  compromise  is  as  yet  far  from 
settled;  and  there  is  an  evident  tendency  among  the 
modern  Marxists  to  mould  their  tactics  more  and 
more  in  accord  with  expediency,  quoting  In  their 
support  the  example  of  Marx  in  the  "  International  " 
and  the  attacks  upon  the  doctrinaire  attitude  made 
by  Engels  in  his  later  utterances.^ 

The  Marxist  weapons  at  present,  then,  are  first 
the  systematic  education  and  organization  of  the 
workers,  and  second  the  ballot.  The  organization 
of  labor  in  the  economic  field  was  to  Marx  of  equal 
importance  with  political  agitation,  and  his  greatest 
practical  efforts  were  thrown  Into  the  International 
Worklngmen's  Association,  to  some  extent  the  ful- 
fillment of  the  appeal  of  the  Communist  Manifesto, 
*'  which  was  not  to  be  a  fighting  organization,  but 
rather  —  so  far  as  was  possible  under  the  conditions 
prevailing  on  the  continent  of  Europe  —  a  center 
for  all  endeavors  pointing  to  the  emancipation  of 
the  laboring  class."  ^ 

The  Marxian  movement  has,  accordingly,  always 
been  consistently  friendly  towards  the  labor  unions, 
the  only  differences  of  opinion  on  the  matter  being  as 

•  Kampffmeyer,  Changes  in  Theory  and  Tactics,  p.  40,  seq. 

•  Spargo,  Sidelights  on  Contemporary  Socialism,  p.  144. 

•  Liebknecht,  Karl  Marx,  p.  37. 


32  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

to  the  method  of  labor  organization  and  the  rela- 
tive importance  of  political  and  industrial  action. 
The  Socialist  unions  in  Germany  to-day  number 
1,800,000  out  of  the  whole  trade  union  membership 
of  2,200,000,  and  the  individual  leaders  of  the  work- 
ingmen  are  almost  invariably  their  leaders  on  the 
political  field  also.^ 

Voluntary  cooperatives  were  a  generation  ago 
associated  with  the  non-Marxian  rather  than  the 
Marxian  Socialists.  Of  recent  years,  however,  the 
cooperative  movement  in  Belgium,  Holland,  and  Ger- 
many as  well,  has  come  to  be  considered,  along  with 
that  of  organized  labor,  as  the  natural  ally  of  politi- 
cal Socialism  in  the  class  struggle.^ 

Since  an  important  part  of  the  present  study  deals 
with  an  inquiry  into  the  Marxist  or  contrary  char- 
acter of  American  Socialism,  it  has  been  necessary  to 
enter  into  this  sketch  of  the  doctrines  of  Marx  and 
Engels,  commonly  termed  Marxian  or  scientific  so- 
cialism. We  must  now  touch  with  equal  brevity 
upon  the  history  of  Socialism  in  the  United  States, 
its  independent  and  contributed  tendencies. 

*  See  Kampffmeyer,  p.  138,  seq.  •  Ibid.,  p.  152,  seq. 


CHAPTER   III 

THE  HISTORY  OF  SOCIALISM  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES  ^ 

For  a  large  part  of  the  nineteenth  century,  the\ 
United   States   was   the   happy   hunting-ground   of  \ 
Socialist,    or    more    properly    Communist,    experi-    / 
menters.    The  movements  of  Owen,  of  Fourier,  and  / 
of  Cabet  all  bore  their  chief  fruit  on  American  soil,  / 
and  up  to  the  time  of  the  Civil  War  the  term  So-| 
cialism  conveyed  the  idea  merely  of  Utopian  com-! 
munism.    While  several  of  these  settlements,  notably 
that  of  Brook  Farm,  numbered  among  their  mem- 
bers men  and  women  of  the  first  rank  in  literature 
and  social  reform,  they  cannot  be  said  to  have  left  \ 
any  real  impress  upon  modern  Socialism  except  in 
so  far  as  the  individual  influence  of  these  persons 
has  permeated  to  some  extent  the  thought  of  the  | 

American  people.  y 

The  real  beginnings  of  Socialism  in  the  United  ^h--^ 
States  are  to  be  found  in  two  quarters  far  removed  '^ 
from  the  philosophic  ease  of  the  Fourierist  Intel-   /^^ 
lectuals.  ^     / 

First  of  all,  the  exodus  of  German  radicals  cuI-[        \ 
minating  in  the  years  after  the  uprising  of   1848  v.^ 

*  Morris  Hillquit's  History  of  Socialism  in  America  has  been  used  as 
the  basis  of  this  chapter,  as  far  as  the  year  1903.  For  information  as  to 
the  S.  L.  P.  and  the  Industrial  Workers  of  the  World  the  writer  is  indebted 
to  Dr.  Frank  Bohn.j 


34  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

could  not  fail  to  bring  to  America  little  knots  of 
revolutionists  such  as  that  which  formed  about  Marx 
and  Engels  in  London.  While  the  chief  of  these  exiles 
in  the  United  States  was  the  non-Marxian  Wilhelm 
Weitling,  founder  of  the  Allgemeine  ArbeiterhutKfzt 
Philadelphia  in  1850,  this  period  marks  the  beginning 
of  Marxian  Socialism  in  America,  in  the  activity  of 
Joseph  Weydemeyerj  who  published  for  the  first 
time  in  his  paper,  The  Revolution^  Marx's  essay  On 
the  i8th  Brumaire  of  Louis  Bonaparte. 

After  the  general  suspension  of  reform  move- 
ments during  the  Civil  War,  we  see  a  second  out- 
burst of  German  radicalism  in  America  in  the  dif- 
ferent sections  of  the  International  Workingmen's 
Association  which  sprang  up  in  New  York,  Chicago, 
and  San  Francisco.  In  New  York  there  was  even 
an  independent  political  party,  the  Social ..Earty, 
which,  though  it  lived  through  but  one  campaign, 
..  that  of  1868,  may  be  designated  the  first  Socialist 
party  in  the  United  States.  Soon  after  the  war 
Marx's  Capital  had  been  published,  and  the  German 
agitators  in  America,  both  workingmen  and  "  intel- 
lectuals," became  thoroughgoing  Marxians.  The 
International  movement  spread  and  reached  its  cul- 
mination in  the  transfer  of  the  General  Council  of 
that  body  in  1872  from  London  to  New  York;  but 
the  fortunes  of  the  association  as  a  whole  were  al- 
ready waning,  and  the  last  convention,  held  at  Phil- 
adelphia in  1876,  was  compelled  to  announce  the 
formal  dissolution  of  the  International.  The  Ger- 
man period  of  Socialism  in  the  United  States  may 
be  said  to  have  ended  with  this  dissolution. 

The  second  beginning  of  American  Socialism  is  to 

be  found  in  the  native  labor  movement.     In  ante- 

f 


OF  THE   PRESENT   DAY  35 

bellum  days  the  labor  activity  in  this  country  was 
weak  and  intermittent.  The  predominance  of  agri- 
culture, the  high  wages  caused  by  the  presence  of 
free  and  fertile  land,  and  the  fact  of  manhood  suf- 
frage, all  combined  to  prevent  the  crystallization 
of  social  classes  in  the  North,  and  such  labor  organi- 
zation as  existed  was  usually  the  result  either  of 
some  temporary  and  local  controversy  between  em- 
ployer and  employed  or  of  the  efforts  of  foreign 
workingmen  to  transplant  their  old-world  struggles 
in  American  ground. 

The  Civil  War  marked  the  close  of  the  pioneer 
period  in  American  history,  with  the  beginning  of 
industry  on  a  national  scale  and  of  a  definite  prole- 
tarian class  among  the  whites.  In  1866,  accordingly, 
we  have  the  National  Labor  Union,  differing  from 
previous  unions  in  its  national  character,  its  origin 
in  American  conditions,  and  its  leadership  by  Ameri- 
cans, notably  William  Sylvis,  of  Pennsylvania.  Syl- 
vis  even  succeeded'in  organizing  a  Labor  Reform 
Party,  the  attitude  of  which  can  be  seen  from  the 
following  declaration  of  Sylvis:  — 

"Our  people  are  being  divided  Into  two  classes  — 
the  rich  and  the  poor,  the  producers  and  the  non- 
producers.  The  working-people  of  our  nation,  white 
or  black,  male  and  female,  are  sinking  to  a  condition 
of  serfdom.  Even  now  slavery  exists  in  our  land, 
worse  than  ever  existed  under  the  old  slave  system."  V' 

The  National  Labor  Union,  and  with  It  the  Labor  y^. 
Reform  Party,  weakened   and  finally  disappeared  ^" 
after  the  death  of  Sylvis  in  1869,  and  it  was  not;:^^^ 
until  after  the  panic  of  1873,  when  the  workers  of  "^fs^ 

*  Hillquit,  op.  cit.,  p.  189.  ^ 


36  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

America  learned  to  boast  no  longer  their  Immunity 
from  the  conditions  of  labor  throughout  the  world, 
that  a  permanent  Socialist  or  Labor  Party  was 
formed.  In  1874  there  was  organized  in  New  York 
the  Social-Democratic  AVorkingmen^s  Party^  which 
two  years  later  united  wTEE^ltlier  "organizations  under 
the  name  of  J'j^orkingmen's  Party  of  the  United 
States.  In  1877  the  name  waS""dianged  once  more, 
and  as  the  Socialist  Labor  Party  this  body  still  sur- 
vives as  the  smaller  of  the  two  Socialist  parties  at  the 
present  day. 

For  ten  years  the  party  grew  but  Intermittently, 
and  was  compelled  to  fight  against  serious  elements 
of  weakness.  At  first,  not  more  than  10%  of  its 
members  were  native  Americans,  the  majority  being 
German  workmen  or  political  refugees,  often  with 
neither  a  vote  nor  a  knowledge  of  the  English  lan- 
guage. Their  doctrine  was  Marxian  Socialism,  in- 
terpreted by  the  principles  of  the  German  working- 
class  movement,  with  as  yet  no  specific  application 
to  the  needs  of  the  American  proletariat,  which  had 
hardly  begun  to  be  conscious  of  itself.  The  trades 
unions,  moreover,  which  in  Germany  had  sprung  up 
chiefly  as  a  result  of  Socialist  agitation,  were  in 
America  already  existing,  but  occupied  almost  en- 
tirely with  strikes  and  local  betterments  and  unin- 
fluenced by  broad  considerations  of  either  economics 
or  the  solidarity  of  labor. 

Most  serious  of  all  was  the  fact  that  the  Anar- 
chists, banished  from  the  International  by  Marx  in 
1872,  were  not  long  in  transferring  their  chief  ac- 
tivity across  the  Atlantic  and  infecting  with  their 
doctrines  the  more  revolutionary  of  the  American 
Socialists.     For  several  years  there  was  a  question 


OF  THE   PRESENT   DAY  37 

as  to  which  group  would  triumph,  but  in  1883  the 
weakened  Socialist  Labor  Party  declared  definitely 
against  "  the  folly  of  the  men  who  consider  dynamite 
bombs  as  the  best  means  of  agitation,"  ^  and  con- 
ducted a  slowly-winning  fight  with  the  Anarchist  In- 
ternational Working-People's  Association  until  the 
latter  received  its  death-blow  in  the  execution  of 
its  leaders  at  Chicago  in  1887.  Since  that  date  the 
Anarchist  agitation  in  this  country  has  been  so  scat- 
tered and  unsystematic  as  to  affect  the  Socialists  but 
little.  Individual  Socialists  and  Anarchists  at  times 
work  together  in  such  matters  as  cooperative  asso- 
ciations, protest  meetings,  and  free  speech  demon- 
strations, but  harmony  even  then  is  rare,  and  in  all 
political  matters  they  stand  definitely  apart.^ 

At  its  beginning  the  Socialist  Labor  Party,  in  view 
of  its  numerical  weakness,  made  the  following  state- 
ment: "  The  sections  of  this  party  and  all  working- 
men  generally  are  earnestly  requested  for  the  time 
being  to  abstain  from  all  political  movements,  and  to 
turn  their  backs  upon  the  ballot-box."  * 

Even  during  the  first  few  years,  however,  local 
candidates  were  sometimes  nominated  and  even 
elected,  and  in  1880  the  Greenback  Party  was  sup- 
ported in  the  national  election.  Having  accomplished 
nothing  by  this  alliance,  the  Socialists  in  1884  again 
advised  abstention  from  the  ballot,  but  in  1886  a 
wave  of  labor  parties  swept  over  the  country,  with 
which  Socialists  in  several  localities  made  common 
cause.  The  most  important  of  these  movements 
was  the  New  York  municipal  campaign,  in  which  the 

*  Hillquit,  op.  cit.,  p.  241. 

2  See  Leonard  Abbott  in  The  Call,  June  14,  1910. 

*  Hillquit,  op.  cit.,  p.  260. 


38  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

Socialist  Labor  Party  fused  with  the  local  labor 
organizations  and  the  Single  Taxers  to  form  the 
United  Labor  Party,  with  Henry  George  as  candi- 
date for  mayor.  Although  a  striking  success  was 
achieved  in  defeating  Theodore  Roosevelt,  the  Re- 
publican nominee,  and  keeping  down  to  22,000  the 
plurality  of  the  Democrat,  Abram  Hewitt,  the  alli- 
ance proved  but  temporary.  The  next  year  it  was 
dissolved  by  the  expulsion  of  the  Socialists  from  the 
United  Labor  Party  on  technical  grounds. 

After  this  experience  there  was  no  further  fusion 
by  the  Socialists,  and  in  1892  a  presidential  ticket 
was  nominated  for  the  first  time.  The  vote  grew 
steadily  from  21,512  in  1892  to  82,204  in  1898, 
a  date  which  marks  the  zenith  of  the  Socialist  Labor 
Party. 

The  relation  between  the  Socialists  and  the  labor 
unions  could  not  fail  to  be  of  importance  in  the 
history  of  both.  From  the  beginning  of  its  career, 
the  S.  L.  P.  continued  to  be  associated  on  a  friendly 
basis  with  several  labor  federations  centering  about 
New  York.  As  yet  there  was  no  national  labor 
organization  of  importance.  In  1878,  however,  the 
Knights  of  Labor,  which  had  started  as  a  secret  fra- 
ternity nine  years  before,  became  a  public  organiza- 
tion, and  grew  so  rapidly  that  by  1886  it  claimed  a 
membership  of  over  half  a  million.  With  a  platform 
so  socialistic  In  tone  as  to  suggest  the  Communist 
Manifesto,  the  Knights  of  Labor  was  neither  a  revo- 
lutionary nor  a  democratic  body,  and  not  till  toward 
the  end  of  its  career  did  It  come  into  close  contact 
with  the  S.  L.  P.  The  American  Federation  of 
Labor,  on  the  other  hand,  formed  in  1886  and  soon 
rivaling  the  Knights,  united  a   fairly  conservative 


OF  THE   PRESENT   DAY  39 

declaration  of  principles  with  a  really  radical  per- 
sonnel and  democratic  administration,  and  from  the 
first  it  contained  many  Socialists.  Though  even  the 
president,  Samuel  Gompers,  was  at  the  outset 
friendly  toward  Socialism,  the  Socialist  resolutions 
introduced  in  the  conventions  from  time  to  time  were 
always  rejected,  and  in  1890  a  charter  was  refused 
to  the  Central  Labor  Federation  of  New  York,  on 
the  ground  that  one  of  its  affiliated  bodies  was  the 
"  American  section  "  of  the  S.  L.  P.  From  that  time 
the  S.  L.  P.  has  been  a  bitter  enemy  of  the  American 
Federation  of  Labor. 

The  Socialist  Labor  Party  In  New  York  now 
turned  its  attention  to  the  Knights  of  Labor,  and 
succeeded  in  electing  several  of  its  members  delegates 
to  the  General  Assembly,  by  the  help  of  whom  in  1 893 
T.  V.  Powderly  was  defeated  as  Master  Workman 
of  the  order  by  J.  R.  Sovereign.  The  failure  of  Mr. 
Sovereign  to  keep  his  promise  to  appoint  a  Socialist 
editor  of  the  official  organ  brought  about  an  acrimo- 
nious controversy  between  Sovereign  and  Daniel  De 
Leon,  the  leader  of  the  Socialist  Labor  Party  and 
editor  of  its  daily,  The  People.  As  a  result  of  this 
quarrel  the  convention  of  the  Knights  of  Labor  in 
1895  refused  to  seat  Mr.  De  Leon  as  delegate  from 
the  New  York  District  Assembly,  a  definite  break 
was  made  between  the  two  organizations,  and  the 
Socialist  Labor  Party  assumed  to  the  Knights  of 
Labor  the  same  hostile  attitude  that  it  already  bore 
toward  the  American  Federation  of  Labor. 

De  Leon  and  the  other  New  York  leaders  now 
decided  definitely  to  abandon  all  plans  for  the  conver- 
sion of  the  national  unions  from  within,  and,  with 
a  nucleus  consisting  of  the  local  unions  of  the  Knights 


40  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

of  Labor  who  had  remained  true  to  the  S.  L.  P.,  to 
form  a  new  organization,  the  Socialist  Trade  and 
Labor  Alliance.  Although  a  labor  rather  than  a 
political  association,  this  alliance  was  in  the  nature 
of  an  appendage  to  the  S.  L.  P.^  demanding  strict 
party  pledges  from  every  officer,  and  giving  repre- 
sentation to  the  party  in  its  conventions.  At  first  it 
denied  the  intention  of  interfering  with  unions  al- 
ready established  or  recruiting  members  except  from 
workers  previously  unorganized,  but  this  promise 
was  soon  forgotten;  and  the  narrow  and  aggressive 
tactics,  together  with  the  highly  centralized  admin- 
istration of  the  S.  T.  and  L.  A.,  brought  about  its 
rapid  disintegration. 

Instead  of  strengthening  the  Socialist  Labor  Party, 
this  ill-fated  labor  organization  proved  a  powerful 
cause  of  dissension,  for  many  of  the  Socialist  party 
members,  already  discontented  under  the  dictatorial 
methods  of  De  Leon  and  his  New  York  coterie,  did 
not  hesitate  to  criticise  the  policy  by  which  the  na- 
tional labor  unions  had  been  so  effectually  antag- 
onized. This  criticism  only  accentuated  the  position 
of  the  "  De  Leonites."  The  People  denounced  not 
only  the  Knights  of  Labor  and  the  American  Federa- 
tion, but  also  all  the  socialistic  movements,  to  be 
mentioned  later  on,  that  were  now  springing  up  out- 
side the  S.  L.  P.  A  "  purification  "  of  the  party 
membership  set  in,  during  the  course  of  which  here- 
tics and  insubordinates  were  recklessly  expelled.  At 
last,  in  1899,  ^"  open  breach  came  about  between  the 
two  factions  led  respectively  by  The  New  York 
People  and  the  Neu>  York  Folks  Zeitung;  and  each 
side  claimed  the  name  Socialist  Labor  Party  until 
just  before  the  elections  of  that  year,  when  the  New 


OF  THE   PRESENT   DAY  41 

York  courts  adjudged  this  title  to  the  original  De 
Leon  adherents.  The  insurgents  called  a  conven- 
tion at  Rochester,  at  which  they  formally  declared 
their  independence,  and  made  overtures  of  union  to 
the  newly-founded  Social  Democratic  Party,  of  which 
more  hereafter. 

It  is  the  fortune  of  the  latter  faction  that  we  must 
now  follow  in  pursuing  the  main  current  of  Socialism 
in  America ;  but  the  De  Leon  body,  bearing  the  old 
title.  Socialist  Labor  Party,  in  still  in  active  existence, 
changed  in  no  respect  as  to  its  dogmatic  interpreta- 
tion of  Socialism  and  its  hostility  to  non-socialist 
labor  organizations,  but  with  rapidly  decreasing 
membership  and  vote.  Socialists  honor  its  memory 
as  the  carrier  of  Marxian  doctrines  to  the  United 
States,  and  as  the  advocate  of  the  working-class  when 
as  yet  it  saw  no  need  of  an  advocate,  but,  like  many 
another  pioneer  organization,  it  outlived  its  power 
of  adaptation,  and  made  room  for  a  Socialist  body 
more  fitted  to  the  needs  of  Americans. 

While,  in  the  last  decade  of  the  century,  the 
S.  L.  P.  was  gradually  hardening  into  an  exclusive 
and  heresy-hunting  organization,  the  rapidly  devel- 
oping capitalism  of  the  country  was  bearing  fruit  in 
radical  movements  of  every  kind.  On  the  one  hand, 
the  growth  of  national  industries  precipitated  vio- 
lent and  far-reaching  contests  between  capitalist  and 
laborer,  such  as  the  Homestead,  Cceur  d'Alene,  and 
Buffalo  strikes  of  1892,  and  the  Pullman  strike  of 
1894,  as  one  result  of  which  Eugene  V.  Debs  suf- 
fered imprisonment  and  afterwards  joined  the  So- 
cialist forces.  On  the  other  hand,  the  eyes  of 
public-spirited  men  and  women  were  being  opened 
to  the  growth  of  the  trust,  of  the  great  fortunes, 


42  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

and  of  the  social  evils  that  had  long  seemed  foreign 
to  our  democracy.  Edward  Bellamy's  Utopian  novel 
"Looking  Backward"  had  appeared  in  1887,  and 
Nationalist  clubs  sprang  up  everywhere,  advocating 
a  centralized  and  aristocratic  Socialism,  but  mixing 
little  with  politics,  and  confined  chiefly  to  edu- 
cated and  prosperous  philanthropists.  The  Society 
of  Christian  Socialists,  numbering  among  its  mem- 
bers Professor  R.  T.  Ely,  Rev.  W.  D.  P.  Bliss,  and 
Professor  George  D.  Herron,  was  organized  in 
1889,  and  the  American  Fabian  Society,  under  the 
leadership  of  Mr.  Bliss  and  Mr.  Laurence  Gron- 
lund,  in  1895.  These  associations  lasted  but  a  few 
years,  and  merged  their  political  activities,  for  the 
most  part,  in  the  People's  Party,  which  promised 
much  for  radicalism  in  1892  and  1894.  They  were 
of  importance,  however,  in  arousing  Americans  to 
the  study  of  social  problems  and  social  forces,  in 
modifying  our  spirit  of  individualism,  and  in  pre- 
paring the  way  for  the  assimilation  of  the  Marxian 
doctrines  to  American  conditions. 

In  1897  two  organizations  united  In  Chicago 
as  a  political  party  under  the  name  of  the  Social 
Democracy  of  America.  The  first  comprised  those 
followers  of  Eugene  V.  Debs  who  had  remained 
in  the  American  Railway  Union  after  its  defeat 
In  the  Pullman  strike,  and  the  second  was  a  so- 
ciety called  the  Brotherhood  of  the  Common- 
wealth, centering  around  J.  A.  Wayland,  of  Kan- 
sas, the  publisher  of  The  Coming  Nation  and 
The  Appeal  to  Reason.  Since  one  wing  of  the 
newly-formed  party  inclined  toward  political  action, 
and  the  other  toward  schemes  of  Western  coloni- 
zation,  a  break  was  Inevitable,   and  In    1898   the 


OF  THE   PRESENT   DAY  43 

minority  of  the  members,  led  by  Eugene  V.  Debs 
and  Victor  Berger,  "  bolted,"  founding  the  Social 
Democratic  Party  of  America. 

It  was  to  the  latter  organization  that  the  "  Roch- 
ester wing  "  of  the  Socialist  Labor  Party  made  its 
overtures  for  union  in  1899.  These  were  received 
favorably,  with  the  result  that  a  joint  committee  on 
union  was  created  and  a  joint  ticket  nominated  for 
the  election  of  1900,  bearing  the  names  of  Eugene 
V.  Debs  of  the  Social  Democratic  Party  for  Presi- 
dent and  Job  Harriman  of  the  Socialist  Labor  Party 
for  Vice-President.  Suddenly  seized  with  distrust, 
however,  the  majority  of  the  former  body  failed  to 
ratify  the  plan  of  union  adopted  by  the  joint  com- 
mittee, and,  as  the  minority  refused  to  abide  by 
their  decision,  confusion  became  worse  confounded. 
There  were  now  three  organizations  in  the  field  in- 
stead of  two,  to  say  nothing  of  the  original  "  De 
Leonite  "  S.  L.  P.  Fortunately  the  joint  presiden- 
tial ticket  nominated  by  the  Chicago  and  Rochester 
factions  necessitated  a  truce  during  the  1900  election, 
and,  after  several  months  of  enforced  cooperation 
in  the  campaign,  all  the  disputing  parties,  still  with 
the  exception  of  the  old  S.  L.  P.,  merged  their  dif- 
ferences in  1 90 1  to  form  the  present  Socialist  Party. 
In  Milwaukee  this  organization  still  goes  under  the 
name  of  the  Social  Democratic  Party. 

Even  in  its  divided  condition  the  Socialist  Party 
had  polled  a  vote  of  96,931,  exceeding  by  more  than 
14,000  the  highest  vote  ever  cast  by  the  Socialist 
Labor  Party,  and  in  1904  this  number  had  more 
than  quadrupled,  amounting  to  409,230.^    In  1908, 

*  S.  P.  Official  Bulletin,  May,  1909. 


44  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

on  the  other  hand,  the  vote  had  grown  only  to 
424,483,  and  the  local  elections  of  1909  were' in 
many  cases  disappointing  to  the  Socialists.*  The 
membership  of  the  party,  moreover,  which  had  in- 
creased from  about  20,000  in  1903  to  41,751  in 
1908,  fell  in  1909  to  41,479.2 

A  remarkable  wave  of  Socialist  advance,  however, 
was  recorded  in  19 10.  The  national  vote  rose  to 
604,756,  showing  a  gain  of  42%  in  two  years;  and 
the  party  membership  registered  58,011,  an  increase 
of  nearly  40%  in  but  one  year.^ 

Until  1 9 10  the  local  victories  of  the  Socialists  had 
been  scattering  and  for  the  most  part  insignificant. 
Brockton  and  Haverhill,  Massachusetts,  had  Social- 
ist mayors  in  1903;  there  have  been  Socialists  in  the 
legislatures  of  Florida  and  Montana,  and  at  one 
time  two  in  that  of  Massachusetts.^ 

A  sure  footing  existed  in  one  state  alone,  Wiscon- 
sin, where  for  years  the  Social  Democrats  have  been 
represented  in  the  Milwaukee  City  Council  and  the 
State  Legislature;  and  it  was  as  a  result  of  this  grad- 
ual upbuilding  of  local  influence  that  the  Socialists 
of  Milwaukee  secured  in  1910  the  first  great  victory 
for  their  party.  Here  the  city  and  county  govern- 
ments were  captured  by  an  almost  record-breaking 
majority,'^  the  number  of  state  senators  was  increased 
to  two,  and  the  representation  in  the  lower  house 
to  twelve.  Most  significant  of  all,  a  Socialist,  Victor 
Berger,  was  elected  from  Wisconsin  to  the  Congress 

>  S.  P.  Official  Bulletin,  May,  1909. 

•  Ibid.,  April,  1909;  February,  191O. 

•  Ibid.,  January,  191 1;  Carl  Thompson,  The  Rising  Tide  of  Socialism. 

•  Thompson,  Const.  Program,  p.   13;    Hillquit,  Hist,  of  Socialism, 
Revised,  p.  342;  N.  Y.  Call,  Dec.  12,  1909. 

•  F.  C.  Howe,  The  Outlook,  June  25,  1910. 


OF  THE   PRESENT   DAY  45 

of  the  United  States,  a  second  Socialist  failing  by 
only  a  small  plurality. 

In  the  same  year  Socialists  were  elected  to  the 
legislatures  of  North  Dakota,  Minnesota,  and  Penn- 
sylvania, Massachusetts  having  seated  a  member  of 
this  party  in  1909. 

Local  elections  throughout  the  country  gave  fur- 
ther striking  indication  of  Socialist  strength.  In  ad- 
dition to  Milwaukee,  Socialist  mayors  were  elected  in 
Berkeley,  California,  in  Butte,  Montana,  and  in  15 
smaller  municipalities  in  the  western  and  central 
states.^  New  York  State,  where  results  had  been 
most  disappointing  in  1909,  made  a  striking  gain  in 
the  campaign  for  the  governorship  of  Charles  Ed- 
ward Russell,  the  magazine  writer. 

It  is  evident  that  the  Socialist  Party  is  no  longer 
a  mere  organization  of  protest,  but  an  aggressive 
third  party,  to  which  power  is  being  entrusted  in  a 
steadily  increasing  degree.  The  object  lessons  af- 
forded by  the  recently  inaugurated  Socialist  admin- 
istrations will  be  of  the  utmost  value  in  determining 
the  applicability  of  Marxian  principles  to  actual 
American  requirements. 

The  relation  of  the  Socialist  Party  to  the  labor 
unions  is  still  a  much-discussed  matter.  The  official 
attitude  of  the  party  is  always  definitely  friendly  to 
all  unions,  without  regard  to  their  political  policies, 
but  the  American  Federation  of  Labor,  the  largest 
body  of  the  sort  in  the  country,  has  never  hitherto 
endorsed  the  Socialist  resolution  so  assiduously 
presented  at  its  conventions.^  A  considerable 
percentage   of   Socialists    are   members   of   unions, 

*  Appeal  to  Reason,  April  22,  191 1. 

»  Robert  Hunter,  N.  Y.  Call,  Nov.  1 1,  1909. 


46  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

however,  the  proportion  In  1908  being  62%  of  those 
members  of  the  party  reporting  under  the  heads 
"  craftsmen  "  and  "  transportation."  As  many  as 
44%  belonged  to  the  American  Federation  of  Labor, 
only  5%  claiming  connection  with  the  Industrial 
Workers  of  the  World  and  13%  with  independent 
unions.^ 

The  Socialist  press  is  invariably  an  organ  of  union- 
ism. At  certain  times  of  stress,  such  as  the  trial  of 
Moyer  and  Ha)rwood  in  1907,  the  Swedish  General 
Strike  in  1909,  and  the  conviction  of  Gompers  and 
Mitchell,  even  the  American  Federation  makes  com- 
mon cause  with  the  Socialists ;  but  President  Gompers 
is  now  an  open  opponent  of  Socialism,  and  mutual 
criticism  and  accusation  are  frequent.  The  eflfect  of 
the  antagonism  upon  Socialist  tactics  will  be  noted 
later  on. 

In  the  meantime  the  Socialist  Trade  and  Labor 
Alliance  of  the  old  Socialist  Labor  Party  has  not 
been  alone  among  Socialist  unions.  In  1904  the 
American  Labor  Union,  a  Western  organization 
containing  150,000  members  and  including  the 
Western  Federation  of  Miners,  endorsed  the  So- 
cialist platform.  The  next  year  there  was  formed 
with  a  nucleus  of  the  Western  Federation  of  Miners 
a  new  organization,  uniting  temporarily  the  rival 
leaders  Debs  and  De  Leon,  the  latter  of  whom  had 
lost  hope  for  the  Socialist  Trade  and  Labor  Alliance, 
but  still  aspired  to  a  Socialist  national  labor  union. 
The  new  body  was  based  upon  the  industrial  form  of 
organization,  by  which  all  workers  in  a  given  indus- 
try are  embraced  in  the  union,  rather  than  upon  the 
craft  organization,  which  includes  only  members  of 

*  S.  P.  Official  Bulletin,  April,  1909.  These  figures  are  based  on  a 
partial  enumeration  of  the  party. 


OF  THE   PRESENT   DAY  47 

the  same  craft  but  may  extend  through  various  in- 
dustries; it  accordingly  received  the  name  of  Indus- 
trial Workers  of  the  World.  Such  an  organization, 
because  of  its  democratic  composition  and  possibili- 
ties for  mass  action,  is  peculiarly  adapted  to  Socialist 
purposes,  and  the  industrial  unions  in  the  United 
States  usually  differ  from  the  craft  unions  in  their  dec- 
laration of  a  class  struggle,  their  opposition  to  such 
conciliatory  bodies  as  the  Civic  Federation,  and  their 
refusal  to  enter  into  contractual  relations  with  em- 
ployers. The  Western  Federation  of  Miners  make  the 
following  statement  in  their  Resolutions  of  1909:  — 

"  We  hold  that  there  is  a  class  struggle  in  society 
and  that  this  struggle  is  caused  by  economic  condi- 
tions. .  .  .  We  hold  that  the  class  struggle  will  con- 
tinue until  the  producer  is  recognized  as  the  sole 
master  of  his  product.  .  .  .  We  hold  that  an  indus- 
trial union  and  the  concerted  political  action  of  all 
wage-earners  is  the  only  method  of  attaining  this 
end."  1 

Although  the  industrial  Workers  of  the  World 
began  prosperously  and  soon  claimed  100,000  mem- 
bers, disruption  presently  set  in.  In  1906  Eugene  V. 
Debs  resigned  from  the  organization  and  the  West- 
ern Federation  of  Miners  withdrew  in  the  same  year. 
In  order  to  bring  together  all  Socialists  to  the  sup- 
port of  the  Industrial  Workers,  the  Socialist  Labor 
Party  won  over  De  Leon  to  a  proposal  of  union  be- 
tween the  two  political  parties;  but  the  Socialist 
Party,  failing  to  overcome  their  long-standing  dis- 
trust of  the  parent  organization,  rejected  the  plan  in 
1908.*    In  the  same  year  De  Leon  came  into  coUi- 

*  Resolutions  quoted  in  Appeal  to  Reason,  Aug.  21,  1909. 
'  S.  P.  Weekly  Bulletin,  Nov.  2,  1907;  Feb.  29,  1908. 


48  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

sion  with  the  other  leaders  of  the  Industrial  Workers 
of  the  World,  and  was  expelled. 

Deprived  of  its  chief  sources  of  strength,  the  in- 
dustrial organization  dwindled  for  several  years, 
claiming  in  1908,  as  has  been  mentioned,  only  5% 
of  the  Socialist  Party,  as  against  44%  belonging  to 
the  American  Federation  of  Labor.  At  present, 
however,  there  are  signs  of  a  revival,  if  not  neces- 
sarily of  the  original  organization,  at  least  of 
the  industrial  principle  in  unionism.  Eugene  V. 
Debs  has  again  joined  the  ranks  and  the  Interna- 
tional Socialist  Review  is  giving  the  industrial  move- 
ment its  unqualified  support.^  The  suppression 
of  the  boycott  in  the  case  of  Gompers,  Mitchell, 
and  Morrison  has  aroused  widespread  dissatisfac- 
tion with  the  older  union  methods,  and  American 
workingmen  are  beginning  to  look  with  greater 
favor  both  upon  political  action  and  upon  radical 
forms  of  organization.^ 

While  the  Socialist  Labor  Party  still  maintains 
The  People  as  its  official  organ,  the  Socialist  Party 
has  sought  to  avoid  the  mistakes  of  its  predecessor  by 
refusing  to  designate  an  official  party  press.  The 
Monthly  Bulletin,  however,  publishes  the  names  of 
the  Socialist  periodicals  on  its  exchange  list,  and  the 
party  is  in  constant  friendly  relation  with  many  of 
these.  The  New  York  Folks  Zeitung  and  the  Jewish 
Forward  are  dailies  dating  from  the  days  of  the 
S.  L.  P.,  but  the  New  York  Daily  Call  has  been  in  exr 
istence  only  since  May,  1908,  and  is  not  yet  on  a  com- 
pletely self-sustaining  basis.  The  Chicago  Daily 
Socialist,  founded  in  1906,  has  but  lately  passed  the 

*  Int.  Soc.  Rev.,  May,  1909,  p.  900. 

'  See  Boudin,  in  I.  S.  R.,  April,  1910,  p.  919,  and  editorial,  p.  933, 
940. 


OF  THE   PRESENT   DAY  49 

experimental  stage.  The  Daily  Register  is  an  English 
publication  of  Lead,  South  Dakota,  and  there  are  in 
addition  to  the  Folks  Zeitung  and  the  Forward,  Ger- 
man dailies  in  Chicago  and  Philadelphia,  Bohemian 
in  Chicago  and  Cleveland,  and  a  Polish  daily  in 
Chicago.  The  most  noteworthy  Socialist  weeklies 
are  the  Social  Democratic  Herald  of  Milwaukee, 
and  the  Appeal  to  Reason  and  The  Coming  Nation 
of  Girard,  Kansas,  all  of  which  antedate  the  forma- 
tion of  the  present  party.  The  Christian  Socialist 
is  the  organ  of  the  Christian  Socialist  Fellowship 
centering  in  Chicago.  Seventeen  other  English 
weeklies  are  issued  in  various  parts  of  the  country, 
and  periodicals  are  also' published  in  German,  Fin- 
nish, Swedish,  Jewish,  Croatian,  Norwegian,  Let- 
tish, Hungarian,  French,  Italian,  Slavonic,  Slovac, 
and  Polish.^ 

The  most  important  monthlies  of  the  American 
Socialists  are  The  Masses,  established  in  New  York 
in  January,  191 1,  and  the  International  Social- 
ist Review.  Since  1900  the  latter  has  represented 
the  international  movement  and  received  contribu- 
tions from  the  leaders  of  Socialist  thought  in  Europe. 
It  is  at  present  the  organ  of  the  "  revolutionists." 
The  Progressive  Woman  is  devoted,  as  its  name  in- 
dicates, to  propaganda  among  women. 

As  Socialism  in  America  is  still  in  the  agitation 
stage,  it  must  be  judged  more  by  its  aims  and  tactics 
than  by  its  accomplishments;  and  though,  owing  to 
the  referendum  system,  we  are  better  able  to  estimate 
the  attitude  of  the  Socialist  rank  and  file  than  of  the 
great  body  of  Republicans  or  Democrats,  yet  it  is 
from  the  political  and  intellectual  leaders  that  we 

1  S.  P.  Official  Bulletin,  November,  1910. 


50  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

must  for  the  most  part  determine  these  aims  and  tac- 
tics. The  general  public  is  rather  ignorant  as  to  who 
constitute  these  leaders,  however,  and  frequently 
authors  and  speakers  are  accepted  by  "  the  man  in 
the  street "  as  representatives  of  Socialism  who  are 
either  outside  the  party  lines  altogether  or  compara- 
tively uninfluential  members  therein.  Since  in  the 
present  study  it  is  necessary  to  select  a  limited  num- 
ber of  persons  as  party  spokesmen,  and  since  the 
determination  of  this  leadership  is  clearly  beyond 
the  power  of  a  single  writer,  the  expedient  will  be 
taken,  as  suggested  in  a  previous  chapter,  of  employ- 
ing as  authorities  chiefly  those  men  and  women  who 
have  held  during  the  last  four  years  the  offices  in  the 
highest  gift  of  the  party.  These  include  the  Na- 
tional Secretary,  the  two  Representatives  in  the  In- 
ternational Socialist  Bureau,  the  National  Executive 
Committee  of  seven  members,  and  the  candidates  for 
President  and  Vice-President  of  the  United  States. 
To  these  may  be  added  those  who  hold  the  highest 
public  offices  to  which  Socialists  have  been  elected,  — 
those  of  State  Senator,  Mayor  and  U.  S.  Congress- 
man,—  as  well  as  the  69  members  of  the  National 
Committee.^  While  this  list  necessitates  the  omis- 
sion of  several  names  which  the  writer  would  with- 
out hesitation  include  among  the  leaders  of  Social- 
ist thought,  yet  it  must,  owing  to  the  party  prac- 
tice of  direct  election,  give  a  near  approximation 
to  this  leadership,  to  be  modified  chiefly  by  the 
consideration  that  men  chosen  to  executive  positions 
often  owe  the  choice  as  much  to  their  proved 
efficiency  as  to  general  acquiescence  in  their  point 
of  view. 

»  S.  P.  Official  Bulletin,  January,  19H. 


OF  THE   PRESENT    DAY  51 

The  National  Secretary  of  the  Socialist  Party  has 
for  several  years  been  Mahlon  S.  Barnes.  Morris 
Hillquit,  author  of  The  History  of  Socialism  in 
America  and  Socialism  in  Theory  and  Practice^  is  the 
present  official  representative  on  the  International 
Socialist  Bureau,  and  has  for  some  time  been  a  mem- 
ber of  the  National  Executive  Committee.  To  Vic- 
tor Berger,  generally  known  as  the  leader  of  the 
"  Wisconsin  movement  "  and  associate  editor  of  the 
'Milwaukee  Social  Democratic  Herald,  belongs  the 
honor  of  being  the  first  Socialist  elected  to  the  Con- 
gress of  the  United  States.  In  view  of  this  election, 
and  of  the  "  advisory  "  seat  given  him  by  the  Copen- 
hagen Congress,  he  ranks  as  a  second  representative 
in  the  International  Socialist  Bureau.  Mr.  Berger 
and  Mr.  Robert  Hunter,  author  of  Poverty  and 
Socialists  at  Work,  are  the  members  of  the  com- 
mittee who  obtained  the  highest  vote  last  year.  John 
Spargo,  a  fourth  long-standing  member  of  the  com- 
mittee, is  well-known  for  his  propaganda  books, 
—  Socialism,  The  Socialists,  The  Substance  of  Social' 
ism,  etc.  Newly  elected  members  are  James  F.  Carey, 
formerly  member  of  the  Massachusetts  legislature, 
George  H.  Goebel,  and  Lena  Morrow  Lewis,  the  first 
woman  to  hold  that  office.  The  candidates  for  Presi- 
dent and  Vice-President  of  the  United  States  in  the 
campaigns  of  1904  and  1908  were  Eugene  V.  Debs, 
the  leader  of  the  American  Railway  Union  in  the 
Pullman  Strike  of  1894,  and  the  late  Ben  Hanford, 
a  member  of  Typographical  Union  No.  6  of  New 
lYork.  Among  Socialist  mayors  are  Emil  Seidel 
of  Milwaukee  and  Reverend  J.  Stitt  Wilson,  of 
Berkeley,  California;  a  State  Senator  of  Wisconsin 
is  W.  J.  Gaylord,  the  translator  of  Kampffmeyer's 


52  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

Changes  in  Theory  and  Tactics  in  the  German  Social 
Democracy.  Of  the  69  members  of  the  National 
Committee,  three  whose  utterances  have  received 
wide  circulation  are  May  Wood-Simons,  author  of 
Woman  and  the  Social  Problemj  Algernon  Lee,  for- 
mer editor  of  the  New  York  Call  and  present  secre- 
tary of  the  Rand  School  of  Social  Science,  and  Carl 
D.  Thompson,  a  member  of  the  Milwaukee  city  gov- 
ernment, whose  book  on  The  Constructive  Pro- 
gram of  Socialism  is  a  typical  exposition  of  the 
"  Wisconsin  "  point  of  view.  Recent  members  of 
the  National  Executive  Committee  are  the  follow- 
ing: J.  G.  Phelps-Stokes;  Joseph  Medill  Patterson; 
Ernest  Untermann,  translator  of  Marx's  Capital, 
and  author  of  Marxian  Economics,  Science  and 
Revolution,  and  The  World's  Revolutions;  J.  M. 
Work,  author  of  What's  So  and  What  Isn't 
in  Socialism;  and  A.  M.  Simons,  editor  of  the 
Chicago  Daily  Socialist  and  formerly  of  the  Inter- 
national Socialist  Review^  and  author  of  Class  Strug- 
gles in  America,  The  American  Farmer^  and  many 
propaganda  tracts. 

It  will  be  noted  that,  conveniently  for  the  present 
Inquiry,  the  foremost  officers  above  named  have  al- 
most without  exception  expressed  themselves  at 
length  in  Socialist  literature.  Where  such  has  not 
been  the  case,  the  writer  has  endeavored  to  supply 
the  deficiency  by  referring  to  public  speeches,  dis- 
cussions in  the  party  press,  the  official  bulletin,  and 
personal  information. 

Before  taking  up  in  detail  the  theories,  aims,  and 
tactics  of  American  Socialism,  the  statement  may  be 
made  that  this  movement  invariably  calls  itself 
Marxian.    The  declaration  is  frequent,  indeed,  that 


OF   THE   PRESENT   DAY  53 

Marx  was  fallible,  and  that  his  works  constitute  no 
inspired  Bible  of  Socialism.  At  times  there  is  even 
ridicule  by  Socialist  writers  of  the  "  orthodox  ultra- 
Marxist,  who  is  more  of  a  Marxist  than  Marx  him- 
self." ^  To  a  man,  however,  the  officers  named 
above,  together  with  the  party  writers,  lecturers,  and 
organizers  in  general,  hold  acknowledged  allegiance 
to  Karl  Marx. 

In  spite  of  this  assurance,  there  is  a  prevalent  im- 
pression that  the  American  Socialist  forces  are 
divided  into  two  camps:  the  one,  known  as  the 
Marxist  or  revolutionist,  adhering  in  all  respects  to 
the  letter  of  the  Marxian  law,  and  the  other,  termed 
revisionist,  constructivist,  or  opportunist,  consisting 
of  a  band  of  social  reformers  who  cling  to  Marx 
merely  as  the  liberal  Churchman  still  clings  to  the 
creed  of  Calvin.  Whether  or  not  the  American  So- 
cialists are  justified  in  their  profession  can  be  dis- 
covered only  by  tracing  in  detail  their  position  on  the 
cardinal  points  of  Marxism  as  mentioned  above,  — 
the  economic  interpretation  of  history,  the  class 
struggle,  and  the  breakdown  of  capitalism,  with  the 
supplementary  doctrines  of  surplus  value  and  the 
cause  of  crises. 

A  more  consistent  study  would  doubtless  have  been 
made  if  the  writer  had  selected  as  types  of  American 
Socialism  only  the  more  scientific  Marxian  theorists. 
American  Socialism,  however,  though  it  claims  to  be 
founded  upon  scientific  principles,  is  in  itself  not  a 
science,  but  an  actual  and  popular  movement,  with 
all  the  imperfections  and  inconsistencies  of  such  a 
movement.  While  the  Marxian  theories  should 
constantly  be  kept  in  mind  as  a  basis  of  compari- 

^  Ladoff,  The  Passing  of  Capitalism,  p.  39,  141. 


54  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

son,  there  Is  in  these  pages  no  attempt  at  a  study 
of  scientific  socialism  as  applied  to  the  United  States, 
but  rather  an  effort  to  determine  the  belief,  program, 
and  methods  of  the  movement  calling  itself  Ameri- 
can Socialism,  irrespective  of  its  consistency  or  scien- 
tific quality. 


CHAPTER  I\^ 

THE   ECONOMIC  INTERPRETATION  OF  HISTORY 

The  economic  interpretation  of  history  was  out- 
lined in  a  previous  chapter  as  the  explanation  of  the 
political  and  intellectual  history  of  an  epoch  by  the 
prevailing  mode  of  economic  production  and  ex- 
change and  the  social  organization  necessarily  fol- 
lowing from  it;  and  is  as  often  termed  by  Socialists 
*'  the  materialistic  conception  of  history  "  or  "  eco- 
nomic determinism,"  with  corresponding  shades  of 
difference  in  Its  meaning.^ 

It  is  universally  accepted  among  American  Social- 
ists, and  Is  employed  in  all  their  literature,  from  the 
constructlvist  pages  of  Robert  Hunter  to  the  revolu- 
tionary pamphlets  of  Debs  and  Hanford.^  Boudin 
and  Untermann,  the  two  chief  Marxian  apologists 
in  America,  accept  without  reserve  the  economic  inter- 
pretation of  history;  while  Boudin  makes  It  a  mere 
introduction  to  the  workings  of  the  capitalist  system, 
Untermann  frankly  inverts  the  method  of  Capital  in 
his  popularization,  Marxian  Economics,  so  as  to 
subordinate  absolutely  the  theoretical  to  the  histori- 
cal.^ Spargo  places  the  doctrine  in  the  forefront  of 
his  work,  and  A.  M.  Simons  has  cast  the  greater  part 

*  Com.  Man.,  p.  6. 

*  Debs,  The  Issue,  p.  13;  Hanford,  Socialism  and  the  Organized 
Labor  Movement. 

*  Boudin,  op.  cit.,  chap,  iv;   Untermann,  op.  cit.,  p.  12. 


'S6  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

of  his  Socialist  writing  into  the  form  of  such  histori- 
cal studies  as  The  American  Farmer  and  Class  Strug- 
gles in  America.^  Hillquit  claims  that  Marx  intro- 
duced the  spirit  of  Darwinism  into  sociology  by  sub- 
stituting the  economic  interpretation  of  history  and 
the  class  struggle  in  the  more  modern  stages  of  social 
development  for  the  instinct  of  self-preservation  and 
the  struggle  for  existence  in  the  lower.^ 

The  platform  of  1908,  it  is  true,  makes  no  formal 
mention  of  this  doctrine,  but  its  opening  paragraph 
sounds  the  note  of  economic  determinism  with  the 
sentences : — 

"Human  life  depends  upon  food,  clothing,  and 
shelter.  Only  with  these  assured  are  freedom,  cul- 
ture, and  higher  human  development  possible.  To 
produce  food,  clothing,  and  shelter,  land  and  ma- 
chinery are  needed.  .  .  .  Whoever  has  control  of 
land  and  machinery  controls  human  labor,  and  with 
it  human  life  and  liberty."  ^ 

The  economic  interpretation  of  history  has  gradu- 
ally been  accepted  as  a  method  in  history  and  eco- 
nomics.   Says  Professor  Seligman:  — 

"  The  economic  interpretation  of  history,  in  em- 
phasizing the  historical  basis  of  economic  institu- 
tions, has  done  much  for  economics.  On  the  other 
hand,  it  has  done  even  more  for  history.  .  .  . 
Whether  or  not  we  are  prepared  to  accept  it  as  an 
adequate  explanation  of  human  progress  in  general, 
we  must  all  recognize  the  beneficial  influence  that  it 
has  exerted  in  stimulating  the  thoughts  of  scholars 

^  Spargo,  The  Socialists,  p.  22. 

*  Hillquit,  Socialism  in  Theory  and  Practice,  p.  51. 

»  S.  P.  Nat.  Platform,  p.  2. 


OF  THE   PRESENT   DAY  57 

and  in  broadening  the  concepts  and  the  ideals  of  his- 
tory and  economics  alike."  ^ 

The  application  of  this  theory,  however,  occupies 
a  different  status,  and  the  world  of  science,  in  sanc- 
tioning the  method,  has  in  no  sense  assented  to  the 
deductions  drawn  from  it  by  Marx  and  Engels  re- 
garding the  tendencies  of  capitalist  society .^  As  this 
application  is  chiefly  in  connection  with  the  doctrines 
of  the  class  struggle  and  the  approaching  fall  of 
capitalism,  detailed  discussion  of  it  will  be  reserved 
to  a  later  chapter. 

In  the  treatment  by  Professor  Seligman,  whose 
essay  on  the  economic  interpretation  of  history  is 
quoted  by  the  Socialists  as  a  just  estimate  of  Marx's 
doctrine  on  this  point,  five  possible  objections  are 
brought  forward  and  refuted :  — 

"  First,  that  the  theory  of  economic  Interpretation 
is  a  fatalistic  theory,  opposed  to  the  doctrine  of  free 
will  and  overlooking  the  importance  of  great  men  in 
history;  second,  that  it  rests  on  the  assumption  of 
*  historical '  laws,  the  very  existence  of  which  is  open 
to  question;  third,  that  it  is  socialistic;  fourth,  that 
it  neglects  the  ethical  and  spiritual  forces  in  history; 
fifth,  that  it  leads  to  absurd  exaggerations."  ^ 

In  the  refutation  of  the  third  objection,  Professor 
Seligman  naturally  places  himself  in  opposition  to 
the  Socialists  above  quoted,  but  in  all  his  other  con- 
clusions they  are  in  substantial  agreement  with  him. 

The  exaggerations  which  Professor  Seligman  men- 
tions, showing  them  to  have  no  necessary  connection 

*  Econ.  Int.  of  Hist.,  p.  159,  seq. 

*  Simkhovitch,  op.  cit.,  No.  2,  p.  652. 

'  Op.  cit.,  p.  90;  see  also  N.  Y.  Worker,  August  24,  Sept.  7,  1907. 


58  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

with  the  economic  interpretation  of  history,  are  not 
absent  among  American  Socialists,  appearing  chiefly 
in  relation  to  the  notions  of  fatalism  and  material- 
ism. As  economic  determinism  the  theory  sometimes 
becomes  a  genuine  fatalism,  Arthur  Morrow  Lewis, 
whose  popularizations  of  science  are  widely  influen- 
tial among  worklngmen,  going  so  far  as  to  oppose  it 
both  to  religion  and  the  doctrine  of  free  will.^  Mr. 
Lewis  is  almost  alone  among  American  leaders,  how- 
ever, in  voicing  these  oppositions,  and  Spargo  is  typ- 
ical in  repudiating  vigorously  the  charge  of  fatalism.^ 

Still  less  frequently  is  the  "  materialistic  "  concep- 
tion of  history  held  in  such  a  degree  as  to  exclude 
the  acknowledgment  of  Idealistic  or  spiritual  factors 
in  society.  Boudin,  a  theorist  of  the  uncompromis- 
ing Marxian  school,  declares  that  Marx  allows  full 
credit  to  ideas  as  moving  forces,  and  is  in  fact  a 
greater  idealist  than  his  opponents  in  that  he  treats 
the  idea  as  an  actual  phenomenon  rather  than  a 
fanciful  abstraction,  and  brings  it  within  the  domain 
of  science  by  searching  for  Its  cause  In  material  con- 
ditions. The  idea  is  a  social  force  which,  though 
generated  by  economic  conditions,  may,  and  often 
does,  influence  an  individual  In  a  direction  contrary 
to  his  own  economic  interest.^ 

Work  denies  emphatically  the  charge  of  "  rank 
materialism,"  and  Spargo  cites  both  Marx  and 
Engels  to  the  effect  that  the  economic  factor  in  his- 
tory Is  not  the  sole  element,  but  the  determining  con- 
dition under  which  men  make  their  own  history.^ 

*  Arthur  Morrow  Lewis,  Ten  Blind  Leaders  of  the  Blind,  pp.  4-5, 
90-98. 

*  John  Spargo,  Socialism,  p.  65. 

*  Boudin,  op.  cit.,  chap,  ii-iii,  passim. 

*  Work,  op.  cit.,  p.  83;  Spargo,  Socialism,  p.  72,  74,  76. 


OF   THE   PRESENT   DAY  59 

While  the  foremost  Socialist  thinkers  in  America 
are  thus  almost  unanimous  in  repudiating  the  exag- 
gerations of  the  economic  interpretation  of  history, 
the  rank  and  file  of  the  party  are  as  a  rule  less  mod- 
erate in  their  expression  of  the  doctrine.  The  quo- 
tation from  the  platform  given  above  bears  traces 
of  the  materialistic  point  of  view,  and  the  following 
passage  from  the  Appeal  to  Reason  illustrates  the 
irreverence  in  intellectual  matters  generated  .by  the 
doctrine :  — 

"  When  you  get  the  '  materialistic  conception  of 
history,'  many  things  are  made  plain.  The  halos 
round  the  heads  of  the  '  great  men '  will  disappear, 
and  you  have  reached  a  point  where  the  mouthings 
of  bourgeois  historians  can  no  longer  fool  you."  ^ 

Throughout  the  correspondence  columns  of  the 
Socialist  press,  in  local  meetings,  and  in  popular  lec- 
tures, we  meet  with  a  determinism  that  lays  stress 
upon  the  inevitability  of  the  revolution,  and  a  mate- 
rialism that  often  scoffs  at  religion,  maintaining  the 
principle  of  "  appeal  through  the  stomach."  The 
outdoing  of  Marx  in  this  respect  may  perhaps  be  due 
to  the  fact  that  the  evolution  of  Hegelianism  was 
conscious  and  the  expression  of  will,  that  of  Dar- 
winism, which  the  followers  of  Marx  have  incorpo- 
rated into  his  theory,  unconscious  and  the  result  of 
inevitable  law,  or  it  may  be  ascribed,  perhaps  more 
practically,  to  the  powerful  impression  made  upon 
the  untrained  mind  when  suddenly  confronted  with 
the  law  of  evolution,  to  the  "  little  knowledge " 
which  "  inclineth  a  man  toward  atheism." 

An  important  consequence  of  economic  interpreta- 

^  Appeal  to  Reason,  Mar.  i6,  1907. 


6o  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

tion  In  its  extreme  form  is  the  denial  of  an  absolute 
standard  of  ethics  and  the  substitution  therefor  of 
varying  codes  of  class  morality,  the  bourgeois  on  the 
one  hand  and  the  proletarian  on  the  other.^  Each 
of  these  ethical  systems  prescribes  only  such  virtues 
as  tend  to  the  advantage  of  its  respective  class;  and 
such  habits  as  thrift  and  reverence  are  as  character- 
istic of  the  bourgeois  as  union  solidarity  and  world- 
patriotism  of  the  proletarian.  Thus  to  the  extremist 
"  good  "  and  "  bad  "  are  mere  euphemisms  for  rela- 
tions of  class-interest. 

Differences  as  to  the  fatalistic  element  in  economic 
determinism  exert  in  two  ways  an  effect  upon  the 
policy  of  the  Socialist  Party. 

The  first  of  these  has  to  do  with  the  "  great  man 
theory."  While  the  doctrine  of  absolute  equality 
has  never  entered  into  Marxian  Socialism,  the  deter- 
ministic philosophy  has  to  some  extent  taken  its  place 
in  ascribing  all  great  achievements  to  social,  rather 
than  individual  influences,  and  in  refusing  to  allow 
"  credit "  to  superior  persons  for  mental  and  moral 
qualities  due  to  environment  rather  than  to  their  own 
exertions.  This  philosophy  is  doubtless  largely  ac- 
countable for  the  vigorous  repudiation  of  leadership 
before  alluded  to,  the  exaggerated  democracy  which, 
as  we  shall  see  later,  characterizes  the  socialist 
parties,  and  the  "  proletarian-intellectual "  contro- 
versy which  furnishes  a  frequent  basis  for  internal 
disputes. 

The  second  effect  upon  socialist  policy  lies  in  the 
fundamental  antagonism  between  determinism  and 
human  choice.  According  to  the  degree  in  which 
Marxians  recognize  the  latter  element  as  a  social 

^  R.  R.  La  Monte,  op.  cit.,  p.  59,  seq.,  76. 


OF  THE   PRESENT   DAY  6i 

factor,  they  endeavor  on  the  one  hand  to  construct 
an  outline  of  the  future  commonwealth  which  shall 
stand  the  test  of  desirability,  and  on  the  other  to 
introduce  Socialist  modifications  into  present  society 
by  means  of  the  ballot.  They  thus  tend  toward  con- 
structive political  action.  The  extreme  determinists, 
on  the  contrary,  expect  "  the  stars  in  their  courses  " 
to  fight  for  Socialism,  irrespective  of  the  blunders  or 
achievements  of  its  supporters.  They  refuse  to  sub- 
mit details  for  the  coming  society  on  the  ground  that 
these  will  come  about,  whether  desirable  or  not,  by 
the  automatic  working  of  economic  forces  which  the 
future  is  to  develop.  They  devote  their  efforts  to 
organizing  the  workers  and  arming  them  with  polit- 
ical rights  against  the  day  of  predestined  revolution, 
leaving  in  general  all  plans  for  progressive  amelio- 
ration and  socialization  to  the  inevitable  action  of 
industrial  forces  during  the  last  stages  of  capitalism. 
We  have  seen  that  the  economic  interpretation  of 
history  is  present  in  all  utterances  of  American  So- 
cialism and  constitutes  the  conscious  basis  of  the 
movement  in  all  its  phases.  While  the  leaders  and 
theoreticians  almost  without  exception  deny  the 
charges  of  fatalism  and  materialism,  quoting  the 
well-known  modifications  of  the  doctrine  by  Marx 
and  Engels,  there  is  a  distinct  tendency  to  exaggera- 
tion in  these  two  directions  among  the  membership 
of  the  Socialist  parties.  This  exaggeration  is  of 
practical  importance  in  the  tendency  to  substitute  a 
new  ethical  standard  for  the  working-class,  to  per- 
meate the  Socialist  parties  with  an  antagonism  to 
leadership,  and  to  inculcate  in  the  "  revolutionary  " 
faction  a  policy  of  organized  protest  rather  than  of 
constructive  activity. 


CHAPTER   V 

THE   CLASS   STRUGGLE 

In  the  United  States  the  division  of  the  Socialist 
from  the  social  reformer  Is  made  largely  upon  the 
basis  of  the  recognition  of  the  class  struggle.  While 
Bellamy,  whose  millennium  was  to  proceed  from  a 
wave  of  enlightenment  on  the  part  of  all  classes,  knd 
Gronlund,  who  exclaims,  — 

"  European  Socialists  .  .  .  actually  preach  class 
war  between  worklngmen  and  the  possessing  classes. 
.  .  .  God  preserve  us  here  from  such  a  doctrine,"  — 

were  thorough  collectivists,  yet  they  are  not  ac- 
knowledged by  present-day  American  Socialism.^ 
Though,  as  we  shall  notice,  the  shades  of  this 
struggle  are  infinite,  even  such  distinctly  middle-class 
organizations  as  the  Intercollegiate  Socialist  Society, 
the  Collectlvist  Society  of  New  York,  and  the  Chris- 
tian Socialist  Fellowship  preach  Its  existence,  and  it 
is  only  the  non-party  Socialist,  represented  in  New 
York  by  Mrs.  Charlotte  Perkins  Oilman  and  by 
Mr.  John  Martin,  who  definitely  opposes  this 
doctrine. 

The  Socialist  Party  platform  declares  the  class 
struggle  in  no  uncertain  terms :  — 

*  Bellamy,  Looking  Backward,  p.  57;  Gronlund,  New  Economy. 
p.  u. 


AMERICAN   SOCIALISM  6$ 

"  A  bitter  struggle  over  the  division  of  the  prod- 
ucts of  labor  is  waged  between  the  exploiting  proper- 
tied classes  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  exploited  prop- 
ertyless  class  on  the  other.  In  this  struggle  the  wage- 
working  class  cannot  expect  adequate  relief  from  any 
reform  of  the  present  order  at  the  hands  of  the  dom- 
inant class.  .  .  .  The  struggle  between  wage  workers 
and  capitalists  grows  ever  fiercer,  and  has  now  be- 
come the  only  vital  issue  before  the  American  people. 
The  wage-working  class,  therefore,  has  the  most 
direct  interest  in  abolishing  the  capitalist  system."  ^ 

So  also  the  New  York  municipal  platform :  — 

"  The  only  real  issue  in  this  campaign,  as  in  all 
other  campaigns,  is  the  contest  between  the  working 
class  and  the  capitalist  class  for  the  possession  of 
the  powers  of  government.  .  .  .  Between  these  two 
classes  there  can  be  no  peace,  no  compromise.  The 
strife  is  increasing  and  grows  ever  fiercer  and  in  no 
country  more  than  this."  ^ 

The  one  condition  for  membership  in  the  Socialist 
Party  is  subscription  to  the  formula :  — 

"  I,  the  undersigned,  recognizing  the  class  struggle 
between  the  capitalist  class  and  the  working  class, 
and  the  necessity  of  the  working  class  constituting 
themselves  into  a  political  party  distinct  from  and 
opposed  to  all  parties  formed  by  the  propertied 
classes,  hereby  declare  that  I  have  severed  my  rela- 
tions with  all  other  parties,"  etc.^ 

By  far  the  commonest  topic  of  the  street  meeting 
and  the  local  discussion  is  the  class  struggle,  and  by 

^  S.  p.  National  Platform,  1908,  p.  2. 

2  N.  Y.  Municipal  Platform  of  1909,  Preamble. 

»  S.  P.  National  Constitution,  Art.  2,  Sec.  5. 


64  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

few  other  allusions  can  the  party  orator  win  such  ap- 
plause from  a  working-class  audience.  Hardly  a 
page  of  the  Socialist  press  is  free  from  such  declara* 
tions  as  the  following :  — 

"  The  sooner  the  class  struggle  be  understood, 
fought  out,  and  the  incident  closed,  the  better  for 
the  working  class  and  the  race  as  a  whole."  ^ 

"  To  improve  their  condition  in  any  way  .  .  .  the 
laborers  must  fight.  .  .  .  And  they  must  also  be  pre- 
pared to  be  clubbed,  shot,  arrested,  fined,  impris- 
oned, and  be  generally  treated  as  rebels,  enemies  of 
society.  Such  is  the  nature  of  the  harmony  between 
capital  and  labor."  ^ 

"  Now  the  working-class  is  organizing  to  over- 
throw the  capitalist  regime  and  put  the  working  class 
in  power.  That  also  is  war  and  every  strike  is  a 
battle  in  that  war,  and  when  battles  are  fought  some 
one  generally  gets  hurt."  ^ 

Hillquit,  Simons,  Spargo,  and  Untermann  quote 
with  one  accord  the  doctrine  as  set  forth  in  the  Com- 
munist Manifesto,  and  Simons  has  entitled  one  of 
his  studies  Class  Struggles  in  America.^ 

W.  J.  Ghent,  author  of  Our  Benevolent  Feudalism 
and  Mass  and  Class,  represents  the  "  intellectual  " 
and  moderate  Marxians.  He  tells  the  workman, 
however,  — 

"  Your  employer's  interests  in  the  matter  of  hours, 
wages,  and  conditions  in  your  particular  trade  are 
antagonistic  to  your  own  interests."  ^ 

*  Western  Qarion,  quoted  in  N.  Y.  Worker,  Sept.  2,  1907. 

*  N.  Y.  Call,  Dec.  7,  1909.        '  Appeal  to  Reason,  Oct.  9,  1909. 

*  Hillquit,  Socialism  in  T.  and  P.,  p.  154;  Simons,  Philosophy  of 
Socialism,  p.  4,  Single  Tax  and  Socialism,  p.  13;  Spargo,  Socialism, 
p.  12$;  Untermann,  Marxian  Economics,  p.  165. 

*  N.  Y.  Worker,  July  11,  1908.  / 


OF  THE   PRESENT   DAY  65 

When  J.  G.  Phelps-Stokes  joined  the  Socialist 
Party  in  1906,  he  based  his  decision  upon  the  recog- 
nition by  him  of  the  existence  in  America  of  two  eco- 
nomic classes,  those  who  produce  more  than  they 
consume,  and  those  who  consume  more  than  they 
produce.^ 

Without  exception  the  Socialist  leaders  affirm  the 
necessity  not  only  of  acknowledging,  but  of  empha- 
sizing the  class  struggle  in  propaganda.  Even 
Victor  Berger,  United  States  Congressman  and  ac- 
knowledged head  of  the  constructive  forces  in  the 
party,  maintains  that  emphasis  upon  this  point  is  both 
desirable  and  necessary,  since  it  would  be  foolish  and 
wrong  to  deny  the  existence  of  economic  classes. 

George  Allan  England,  a  well-known  Socialist 
magazine  writer,  modifies  the  statement  to  some 
extent :  — 

"  Whether  or  not  our  propaganda  should  lay  em- 
phasis upon  the  class  struggle  depends  upon  what 
stage  of  development  we  have  reached.  In  the 
earlier  stages,  when  the  movement  is  educational 
rather  than  political,  this  and  other  doctrinal  matters 
should  be  stressed.  Later,  when  the  political  char- 
acter predominates,  and  when  the  immediate  de- 
mands are  in  a  fair  way  to  be  realized,  those  should 
take  first  place." 

Morris  Hillqult  suggests  with  characteristic  tact 
that  as  an  abstract  doctrine  the  class  struggle  is  likely 
to  be  misunderstood  by  non-socialists  and  to  provoke 
antagonism  rather  than  to  convert.  He  advises 
therefore  that,  while  Socialism,  as  a  class  movement, 
cannot   avoid   emphasizing   the    struggle   in  propa- 

»  N.  Y.  Times,  July  13,  1906,  J.  G.  Phelps-Stokes. 


66  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

ganda,  It  should  do  so  largely  by  dwelling  upon  the 
practical  demonstration  of  the  conflict  in  the  criti- 
cism of  existing  conditions. 

While  the  class  struggle  is  thus  emphasized,  as 
well  as  acknowledged,  by  all  divisions  of  American 
Socialists,  the  shades  of  the  struggle  as  thus  declared 
vary  from  the  mere  recognition  of  economic  antago- 
nism to  the  avowal  of  actual  class  hatred.  In  Eugene 
,V.  Debs  the  contest  arouses  genuine  revolutionary 
spirit,  as  he  discerns  In  It  not  merely  the  strife  of 
political  parties,  but  a  life  and  death  struggle  be- 
tween two  hostile  economic  classes.^  The  same 
spirit  appears  throughout  Ben  Hanford's  The  Labor 
fVar  in  Colorado,  and  it  was  Hanford  who  in  the 
1904  convention  gave  vent  to  the  war-cry,  — 

"  The  working-class,  right  or  wrong  —  I  don't 
care  whether  they  are  right  or  wrong."  ^ 

In  contrast  with  the  foregoing  exultation  In  the 
class  struggle  is  Mr.  Spargo's  careful  chapter  upon 
the  subject  in  Socialism,  with  his  repudiation  of  the 
charge  of  preaching  class  hatred,  and  his  declaration 
that  Socialism  is  not  responsible  for  the  existence  of 
the  struggle,  but  Is,  on  the  contrary,  a  constructive 
force  working  to  turn  the  inevitable  contest  away 
from  violence  and  bloodshed  to  a  peaceful  political 
revolution.^  Robert  Hunter  voices  a  similar  point 
of  view  In  the  statement  that  Socialists  do  not  advo- 
cate the  class  conflict,  but  merely  recognize  Its  inev-: 
itability  and  strive  to  abolish  it.* 

*  The  S.  P.  and  the  Working  Class,  p.  5. 

*  Nat.  Convention  of  S.  P.,  1904,  p.  205. 

*  Socialism,  chap,  vi,  Capital  and  Labor,  p.  37,  40. 

*  Socialists  atjWork,  p.  viii.. 


OF  THE    PRESENT   DAY  67 

J.  M.  Work,  consistently  with  his  published  ex- 
pression as  to  the  regrettable  necessity  of  the  antago- 
nism, became  involved  in  a  controversy  on  the  sub- 
ject with  members  of  the  National  Committee  in 
1908.^  In  connection  with  a  minority  report  sub- 
mitted by  him  as  a  member  of  the  National  Platform 
Committee,  he  acknowledged  the  class  struggle,  but 
interpreted  it  in  such  a  way  as  to  arouse  the  indigna- 
tion of  certain  committeemen  of  Washington  and 
Oregon,  the  strongholds  of  "  proletarianism."  While 
Mr.  Work  reaffirmed  his  declaration  that  "  Class- 
consciousness  is  not  class  hatred,"  the  opposing  mem- 
bers went  so  far  as  to  proclaim  their  approval  of 
class  hatred  itself  as  the  only  truly  proletarian  atti- 
tude.^ In  similar  fashion  the  International  Socialist 
Review,  in  its  criticism  of  Spargo's  book.  The  Sub- 
stance of  Socialism,  opposes  the  latter  in  his  re- 
pudiation of  class  hatred.^ 

While  the  class  struggle  doctrine  Is  an  Integral 
part  of  the  Socialist  application  of  economic  deter- 
minism, it  can  also  be  independently  deduced  from 
the  theory  of  surplus  value.  In  American  propo- 
ganda,  on  the  other  hand,  It  appears  usually  as  a 
statement  of  fact  based  upon  economic  phenomena 
such  as  strikes  and  lock-outs,  lying  within  the  obser- 
vation of  the  working-class  to  whom  the  doctrine  is 
addressed.  Its  conspicuous  position  in  the  movement 
serves,  as  has  before  been  mentioned,  to  make  clear 
the  distinction  between  the  Socialist  and  the  social- 
istic reformer.  Debs  tells  us  that  certain  candidates 
for  office,  by  denying  the  class  struggle,  have  almost 

»  Op.  cit.,  p.  89. 

*  Nat.  Weekly  Bulletin,  Jan.  i8,  1908,  etc. 

'  International  Socialist  Review,  April,  19 10,  p.  944. 


68  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

infallibly  fixed  their  status  as  friends  of  capital  and 
enemies  of  labor,  and  even  Robert  Hunter  makes 
the  test  of  a  Socialist  the  side  on  which  he  fights, 
maintaining  that  "  no  well-founded  party  has  ever. 
ignored  the  class  struggle."  ^ 

Within  the  movement  this  doctrine,  even  more 
than  the  economic  interpretation  of  history,  plays  a 
part  in  the  variations  of  Socialist  policy.  In  so  far 
as  the  deterministic  philosophy  has  broken  down, 
among  the  extreme  Socialists,  the  ideal  of  an  abso- 
lute ethical  standard,  this  vacancy  is  filled  by  a  class 
ethics,  the  direct  outcome  of  economic  conditions, 
the  chief  virtue  in  which  is  class-consciousness,  — 
the  recognition  of,  and  loyalty  to,  one's  own  social 
class.  This  class-consciousness  gives  such  an  effec- 
tive reenforcement  to  the  dislike  of  acknowledged 
leadership  above  referred  to  that  we  find  in  some 
Socialist  quarters  a  distrust  by  the  proletariat  of 
those  members  of  the  middle  class  who  have  made 
common  cause  with  them,  and  even  a  loyalty  to  the 
class  of  manual  workers  that  looks  askance  upon 
the  mental  laborers,  or  "  intellectuals,"  who  form 
a  part  of  the  movement. 

The  varying  Socialist  opinions  in  this  matter  are 
illustrated  on  the  one  hand  by  Carl  Thompson,  the 
Wisconsin  Socialist,  who  quotes  the  French  Jaures 
in  his  refusal  to  limit  the  class  struggle  to  wage- 
workers  alone,  and  on  the  other  by  Arthur  Morrow 
Lewis,  who  exults  in  Professor  Ely's  charge  that  So- 
cialism has  tended  to  deprive  the  wage-earners  of  aid 
from  the  other  classes,  and  asserts  that  with  some 
brilliant  exceptions  the  men  who  have  come  to  So- 

*  Debs,  The  Socialist  Party  and  the  Working  Class,  p.  12;  Hunter, 
N.  Y.  Call,  Aug.  17,  1909. 


OF  THE    PRESENT   DAY  69 

cialism  from  the  higher  ranks  have  been  "  of  inferior 
and  not  superior  intelligence."  ^ 

A  point  of  immediate  controversy  which  will  be 
taken  up  later  in  more  detail  is  the  attitude  of  the 
Socialist  Party  toward  the  craft  and  the  industrial 
unions.  The  industrial  unions,  represented  by  the 
Western  Federation  of  Miners  and  the  Industrial 
Workers  of  the  World,  base  themselves  avowedly 
upon  the  class  struggle,  distrust  the  capitalists  to  such 
an  extent  as  to  refuse  to  enter  into  contracts,  and 
attempt  to  sink  all  trade  demarcations  in  an  organi- 
zation of  the  entire  body  of  wage-workers  against 
their  employers.  The  craft  unions,  on  the  contrary, 
in  which  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  is  the 
controlling  force,  make  no  declaration  of  the  class 
conflict,  seek  to  better  conditions  by  separate  nego- 
tiations and  trade  agreements,  and,  by  cooperation 
with  such  organizations  as  the  Civic  Federation,  ac- 
cept the  proposition  that  the  interests  of  master  and 
man  are  identical.  While  the  very  acknowledgment 
of  the  class  struggle  on  the  part  of  a  Socialist  pre- 
cludes his  acceptance  of  the  latter  attitude,  the  de- 
gree of  his  hostility  thereto  is  held  by  certain  mem- 
bers of  the  party  to  measure  his  loyalty  to  the  class 
struggle  doctrine. 

In  connection  with  the  economic  interpretation  of 
history,  the  doctrine  of  the  class  struggle  thus  forms 
the  foundation  of  the  American  Socialist  movement. 
The  acceptance  of  it  Is  universal  among  party  mem- 
bers, and  the  leaders  of  the  organization,  while 
suggesting  tact  in  the  presentation  of  the  doctrine, 
yet  unite  in  advising  emphasis  upon  it  in  all  propa- 
ganda.   As  a  rule,  however,  the  Socialist  repudiates 

^  Thompson,  op.  cit.,  p.  9;  Lewis,  Ten  Blind  Leaders,  p.  79. 


70  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

the  charge  of  class  hatred,  disclaims  responsibility 
for  the  existence  of  the  struggle,  and  maintains  that 
only  by  the  triumph  of  Socialism  can  it  be  ended. 

"  In  abolishing  the  present  system,"  says  the  plat- 
form, "  the  workingmen  will  free  not  only  their  own 
class,  but  also  all  other  classes  of  modern  society: 
the  small  farmer,  .  .  .  the  small  manufacturer  and 
trader,  .  .  .  and  even  the  capitalist  himself,  who  is 
the  slave  of  his  wealth  rather  than  its  master."  ^ 

The  practical  influence  of  the  class  struggle  idea 
is  to  be  seen  chiefly  in  the  distinction  which  it  draws 
between  the  Socialist  and  the  reformer,  in  the  ideal 
of  class-consciousness  which  in  its  extreme  form  in- 
culcates distrust  of  the  intellectual  allies  of  Socialism, 
and  in  its  application  to  the  labor  movement  in  such 
a  way  as  to  create  sharp  antagonism  between  the 
adherents  of  the  craft  and  the  industrial  union. 

*  S.  P.  National  Platfonn,  1908,  p.  3. 


CHAPTER  VI 

THE   THEORY   OF    SURPLUS    VALUE 

As  has  already  been  shown,  not  Marx's  theory  of 
surplus  value,  but  his  economic  interpretation  of  his- 
tory, with  the  consequent  doctrines  of  the  class 
struggle  and  the  fall  of  capitalism,  forms  the  basis 
of  scientific  Socialism.^  As  Marx's  greatest  work, 
Capital,  however,  is  largely  devoted  to  an  expo- 
sition of  this  theory  of  value,  and  as  the  latter  has 
hitherto  furnished  the  chief  point  of  attack  for  the 
more  serious  critics  of  Marxism,  It  is  of  importance 
to  analyze  the  position  of  American  Socialists  with 
regard  to  it. 

While  the  economic  interpretation  of  history  con- 
stitutes the  chief  framework  of  American  Socialist 
writings,  both  popular  and  scientific,  and  while  the 
class  struggle  forms  the  favorite  topic  of  propaganda 
speeches,  one  may  mingle  a  long  time  with  party 
workers  before  encountering  an  explicit  allusion  to 
the  theory  of  value. 

Neither  the  national  nor  the  New  York  munici- 
pal program  makes  any  reference  to  the  theory  other 
than  that  implied  in  the  oft-used  word  "  exploita- 
tion," and  the  subject  seldom  appears  in  the  party 

*  Simkhovltch,  op.  cit.,  No.  i,  p.  195. 


72  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

press  except  in  an  occasional  "  question-box "  or 
course  of  study.  It  is  frequent,  on  the  other  hand, 
to  meet  in  popular  pamphlets  a  declaration  as  to 
the  existence  of  surplus  value,  unconnected  with  any 
theory  as  to  its  origin.  Ben  Hanford  made  the  state- 
ment that  about  one-half  of  the  five  hundred  millions 
profit  of  the  railroads  is  exploited  from  the  employees 
as  withheld  wages;  Leffingwell  makes  the  essence 
of  profit  consist  in  the  circumstance  that  the  worker 
has  received  only  a  small  portion  of  the  value  of  his 
product;  and  Eugene  V.  Debs  speaks  of  the  work- 
ing class  as  "  being  robbed  of  what  their  labor 
produces."  ^ 

At  first  glance,  one  might  form  the  conclusion  that 
Marx's  pure  economics  has  been  discarded  by  the 
American  Socialist  movement,  but  such  is  not  the 
case.  There  is  hardly  a  party  leader  who  does  not, 
when  questioned,  affirm  his  Marxism  in  the  matter 
of  surplus  value,  as  decidedly  as  in  the  class  struggle 
and  the  economic  interpretation  of  history.  J.  M. 
Work  gives  a  simple  statement  of  it;  La  Monte  has 
popularized  it  in  his  lecture  on  Science  and  Socialism, 
and  Hillquit  states  his  unqualified  adherence  to  it; 
presenting  it  in  condensed  form  in  his  Socialism  in 
Theory  and  Practice.^  Both  Ernest  Untermann 
and  his  rival  in  Marxian  interpretation,  L.  B.  Bou- 
din,  have  presented  discussions  of  the  surplus  value 
theory,  which  unite  in  defending  it  in  its  entirety 
against  the  Revisionists,  that  school  of  Socialists 
before  alluded  to,  who,  under  the  leadership  of  the 
German  Bernstein,  have  suggested  that  the  Marxian 

1  Hanford,  Railroading  in  the  U.  S.,  p.  Ii;  Leffingwell,  op.  cit.,  p.  12; 
Debs,  Unionism  and  Socialism,  p.  24. 

2  Work,  op.  cit.,  p.  88;  La  Monte,  op.  cit.,  p.  33;  Hillquit,  Socialism 
in  Theory  and  Practice,  p.  157. 


OF   THE    PRESENT   DAY  73 

theories  be  revised  in  the  light  of  modern  economics 
and  recent  industrial  development.^  A  study  course 
in  Socialism  has  recently  been  published  in  the  party 
press  by  authority  of  the  National  Executive  Com- 
mittee; and  the  three  lessons  of  this  course  which 
are  devoted  to  the  theory  of  value,  with  such  excur- 
sions into  general  economics  as  are  needed  for  its 
comprehension,  show  an  unqualified  acquiescence  in 
the  doctrine.^ 

In  the  rare  cases,  moreover,  in  which  the  value 
theory  is  touched  upon  in  the  unofficial  socialist  press, 
it  is  invariably  defended.  The  Appeal  to  Reason 
occasionally  gives  a  simple  exposition  of  surplus 
value,  and  answers  the  charge  that  no  Socialists  of 
importance  now  preach  the  doctrine  of  Marx  with 
the  challenge,  —  "  Name  a  Socialist  of  importance 
who  does  not  teach  the  Marxian  theory  of  surplus 
value,  the  claim  that  all  profit  is  robbery.  Also  be 
so  kind  as  to  disprove  that  theory."  ^ 

The  apparent  ignoring  of  surplus  value,  then,  in 
American  propaganda,  is  not  to  be  ascribed  to  such 
a  repudiation  of  this  doctrine  as  that  of  the  Fabians 
Hobson  and  Shaw,  but  to  a  realization  that  the 
Socialist  movement  is  founded  upon  economic  deter- 
minism and  the  class  struggle  rather  than  upon  the 
analysis  contained  in  Capitals 

Revisionism,  on  the  other  hand,  has  not  been 
wholly  without  effect  upon  American  Socialists.  The 
statement  is  generally  made  that  Marx  is  fallible, 
although,  as  in  the  case  of  many  other  confessions  of 
human  frailty,  this  statement  is  usually  vigorously 

*  International  Socialist  Review,  September  and  November,  1906. 
2  N.  Y.  Call,  Nov.  13,  Nov.  20,  27,  Dec.  4,  1909. 

'  Aug.  28,  1909;  see  also  April  6,  1907. 

*  Hobson,  op.  cit.,  chap.  x.    Shaw,  Fabian  Essays,  p.  140,  seq. 


74  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

resisted  when  applied  to  any  details  of  the  Marxian 
system. 

The  Wisconsin  wing  of  the  party,  which  in  prac- 
tice has  approached  most  nearly  the  Revisionist  poli- 
cies, is  in  theory  also  the  least  inclined  to  accept 
Marx  as  an  unerring  guide.  One  of  these  leaders 
acknowledges  that  he  has  not  read  Marx's  Capital 
entire;  and  another  states  definitely  that  "  the  theory 
of  value  has  been  qualified  somewhat  of  late  by 
eminent  German  and  French  Marxians." 

In  the  latest  edition  of  Socialism,  Spargo  accepts 
Revisionism  in  principle,  quoting  Marx  and  Engels 
to  show  that  the  Socialist  pioneers  themselves  ridi- 
culed the  idea  of  the  crystallization  of  their  theories 
into  a  dogma,  and  censuring  their  successors  for  a 
failure  in  the  task  bequeathed  them  of  keeping  Marx- 
ism abreast  of  progress.^  When  it  comes  to  par- 
ticulars, however,  he  yields  but  little  of  the  value 
theory,  merely  acknowledging,  as  does  A.  M.  Lewis 
also,  the  break-down  of  the  doctrine  in  the  case  of  a 
monopoly. 

Nowhere  do  we  find  among  American  Socialists 
a  genuine  confronting  of  the  Marxian  value  theory 
with  that  of  marginal  utility.  Spargo  states  his  opin- 
ion that  Marx's  doctrine  may  be  said  to  include  the 
law  of  marginal  utility,'  in  so  far  as  the  basis  of 
social  utihty  is  the  socially  necessary  labor  for  its 
production.^  Boudin  makes  a  similar  declaration, 
asserting  that  social  usefulness,  while  neither  the 
cause  nor  the  measure  of  exchange  value,  constitutes 
its  limitation,  but  neither  of  these  writers  enters 
into  an  explanation  of  his  statement.^     Boudin,  on 

*  Socialism,  Rev.,  p.  120-121.  *  Ibid.,  p.  258,  260. 

•  Boudin,  op.  cit.,  p.  97. 


OF  THE    PRESENT   DAY  75 

the  contrary,  meets  Bohm-Bawerk's  charge  that 
Marx  disregards  the  element  of  utility  by  the  con- 
tention that,  while  Marx  recognizes  the  element  as 
present  in  all  value,  utility  is  qualitative  rather  than 
quantitative  in  character,  and  thus  cannot  measure 
a  purely  quantitative  relation  such  as  exchange  value. 
The  Study  Course  in  Socialism  follows  Boudin  in  this 
argument,  making  the  assertions :  — 

"  Utilities  differ  qualitatively  and  cannot  be  com- 
pared quantitatively.  .  .  .  Nor  does  the  amount  of 
value  depend  upon  the  degree  of  utility.  .  .  .  The 
amount  of  value  depends,  not  on  a  thing's  usefulness, 
but  on  the  difficulty  of  obtaining  It."  ^ 

As  the  law  of  marginal  utility,  however,  is  essen- 
tially a  reduction  of  utility  to  the  quantitative  rela- 
tion, it  is  evident  that  the  American  theorists  here 
fail  to  take  issue  with  the  real  contention  of  Bohm- 
Bawerk. 

A  controversy  existing  recently  among  American 
Marxians  and  Illustrative  of  the  manner  in  which 
Socialists  may  differ  in  their  interpretation  while 
denying  the  principles  of  Revisionism,  related  to  the 
"  great  contradiction  "  in  the  law  of  surplus  value  in 
the  first  volume  of  Capital.  Marx  himself  detected 
this  apparent  contradiction  in  the  course  of  the  vol- 
ume and  promised  its  solution  later  on.  The  second 
volume  failed  to  disentangle  the  knot,  and,  in  re- 
sponse to  a  challenge  from  Engels,  many  economists 
brought  forward  solutions  of  their  own.  Finally, 
the  third  volume  of  Capital  redeemed  the  promise, 
according  to  Engels  and  the  Socialists,  by  solving  the 
problem   In  perfect  consistency  with  the   Marxian 

*  Study  Course  in  Socialism,  Lesson  II;  The  Economics  of  Socialism. 


76  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

theory  of  value,  according  to  Bohm-Bawerk  and  non- 
socialists  by  cutting  the  Gordian  knot  and  giving  up 
the  value  theory  altogether. 

The  contradiction  is  as  follows:  by  the  Marxian 
theory  profit  comes  in  no  case  from  the  investment 
of  constant  capital,  but  only  from  the  investment  of 
variable  capital  in  labor  power  with  its  consequent 
exploitation;  how  does  it  happen,  therefore,  that 
profits  tend  to  an  equality  in  all  industries,  no  matter 
what  may  be  the  proportions  of  constant  and  variable 
capital  in  their  respective  investments? 

Marx  solves  the  riddle  in  this  manner;  —  Accord- 
ing to  the  labor  theory,  surplus  value,  derived  from 
the  investment  of  variable  capital  in  labor  power,  is 
the  sole  source  of  profits ;  therefore  the  total  profits  of 
all  industry  must  be  equal  to  the  entire  surplus  value 
extracted  from  the  laborers.  However,  since  the 
constant  capital  embodied  in  machinery  and  tools  is 
as  necessary  a  condition  to  exploitation  as  variable 
capital  itself,  the  employer  reckons  his  rate  of  profit 
upon  the  whole  mass  of  capital,  just  as  if  it  were 
produced  by  constant  and  variable  alike.  If  all  com- 
modities were  sold  at  their  values,  we  should  thus 
have  different  rates  of  profit  obtaining  in  industries 
enjoying  the  same  rate  of  surplus  value.  Actually, 
however,  goods  are  sold  at  their  real  value  only 
when  they  embody  the  average  proportion  of  constant 
and  variable  capital,  thus  affording  the  average  rate 
of  profit.  In  all  other  cases,  competition  adds  to  or 
subtracts  from  the  actual  cost  price  of  the  commodity 
such  a  quantity  as  will  equalize  the  rate  of  profit  to 
the  average  prevailing  in  industry. 

"  The  average  profit  which  determines  the  prices 
of  production  must  always  be  approximately  equal 


OF   THE    PRESENT   DAY  77 

to  that  quantity  of  surplus-value,  which  falls  to  the 
share  of  a  certain  individual  capital  in  its  capacity  as 
an  aliquot  part  of  the  total  social  capital."  ^ 

The  price  of  production  thus  created  and  the 
market  price  based  upon  it  bear  thus  no  relation  to 
the  specific  labor  value  of  the  commodity  in  question, 
but  are  merely  dominated  by  the  law  of  value,  "  since 
a  reduction  or  increase  of  the  labor-time  required  for 
production  causes  the  prices  of  production  to  fall  or 
to  rise."  2 

Bohm-Bawerk  has  pointed  out  that  the  contradic- 
tion is  here  reconciled  only  by  a  partial  surrendering 
of  the  law  of  value.^  Marx's  reasoning  is  correct  in 
that  the  sum  of  all  the  profits  of  industry  would 
equal  at  once  their  combined  surplus  value  and  their 
entire  value  minus  the  sum  of  the  wages  expended 
in  their  production.  As  he  unhesitatingly  affirms, 
however,  the  relative  exchange  values  of  the  various 
commodities  depend  now  on  the  cost  price  as  adjusted 
to  the  average  rate  of  profit,  and  so  bear  no  necessary 
relation  whatever  to  their  real  relative  labor  values. 
Since,  according  to  Volume  I.  of  Capital,  the  the- 
ory of  value  must  furnish  an  explanation  of  the 
exchange  relation  of  commodities  rather  than  of  their 
total  values,  the  conclusion  is  here  unavoidable  that 
Marx  has  here  sacrificed  the  Inaccurate  but  concrete 
law  with  which  he  set  out  to  a  comparatively  value- 
less general  theory  which  is  nevertheless  more  strictly 
in  accord  with  the  observed  facts  of  industry.^ 

Robert  Rives  La  Monte,  the  American  translator 
of  Deville's  works  on  Socialism,  clings  to  the  literal 

*  Marx,  Capital,  Vol.  III.  p.  211. 

*  Karl  Marx  and  the  Close  of  his  System,  p.  60,  seq. 
8  Capital,  Vol.  I.  p.  41,  ff. 


78  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

law  of  value  as  expressed  In  Book  I.  of  Capital.''- 
Untermann  and  Boudin,  however,  maintain,  with 
Kautsky,  and  in  accordance  with  Book  III.,  that 
commodities  are  not  habitually  sold  at  their  values; 
and  Untermann  claims  that  the  law  of  Book  I.,  was 
merely  "  tentatively  developed  by  Marx  as  an  intro- 
duction to  a  practical  application  to  his  theoretic 
findings  in  Vol.  III."  ^  Both  Untermann  and  La 
Monte  consider  the  subject  as  of  more  than  academic 
importance,  bringing  it  into  connection  with  the  intra- 
socialist  controversy  as  to  revolution  and  reform. 
Each  of  the  disputing  sides,  however,  is  loyal  in  pro- 
testing the  consistency  of  Marx  and  laying  all  the 
blame  on  the  other  party  to  the  controversy.^ 

The  attitude  of  American  Socialist  writers  toward 
the  value  theory  is,  accordingly,  that  of  the  apologist 
Kautsky  rather  than  of  the  revisionist  Bernstein. 
Their  Socialism,  like  the  progressive  orthodoxy  of 
the  modern  churches,  accepts,  when  it  must,  the  re- 
sults of  criticism,  but  whenever  possible  ascribes  an 
error  to  the  mistakes  of  interpreters  rather  than  to 
the  fountain-head  of  orthodoxy  itself. 

The  "  iron  law  of  wages,"  often  carelessly  ascribed 
to  Marx,  but  really  a  contribution  of  Lassalle,  is 
sometimes  erroneously  deduced  as  a  corollary  from 
the  Marxian  law  of  value."*  This  law,  closely  re- 
lated to  the  classical  law  of  wages,  is  as  follows: 
even  if,  by  industry  or  good  fortune,  the  worker's 
product  is  increased,  or  by  thrift  the  cost  of  his 
subsistence  is  diminished,  yet  he  can  never  perma- 

*  Chicago  Socialist,  Mar.  4,  1905,  quoted  by  Untermann,  Marxian 
Economics,  p.  195,  note. 

*  Marxian  Economics,  p.  195,  n. 

*  See  La  Monte,  op.  cit.,  p.  36. 

*  Bernstein,  Ferdinand  Lassalle,  p.  134. 


OF  THE    PRESENT   DAY  79 

nently  receive  in  wages  more  than  this  mere  cost, 
the  natural  value  of  labor.  It  is  obvious  that  the 
only  variation  of  this  statement  from  the  Marxian 
law  of  wages  as  contained  in  the  theory  of  value  is 
in  the  epithet  "  iron,"  implying  as  it  does  an  invari- 
able standard  of  living  fixed  at  the  minimum  of  sub- 
sistence; and  this  invariability  is  clearly  in  opposition 
to  the  facts  of  the  frequent  raising  of  the  standard 
of  living  above  the  subsistence  level  by  trades  unions, 
legislation  and  education  in  consumption. 

Since  all  thoughtful  Socialists,  including  Marx  and 
Engels,  have  recognized  the  possibility  of  modifi- 
cation of  the  law  of  wages  through  social  forces, 
Spargo  has  denied  the  existence  of  the  "  iron  law."  ^ 
It  must  not  be  forgotten,  on  the  other  hand,  that, 
like  some  other  German  notions  now  discarded  in 
Germany,  Lassalle's  law  of  wages,  with  or  without 
its  figurative  title,  has  not  disappeared  entirely  among 
American  Socialists.  In  the  party  discussion  or  the 
propaganda  pamphlet  one  may  still  see  references 
to  the  iron  law  or  the  subsistence  minimum  of  wages, 
and  such  broad  statements  as  this  from  Eugene  V. 
Debs:  — 

"  All  the  wealth  the  vast  army  of  labor  produces 
above  its  subsistence  is  taken  by  the  machine-owning 
capitalists."  ^ 

It  is  evident,  however,  that  Debs,  as  an  active 
unionist,  could  not  fail  to  modify  his  assertion  by 
an  acknowledgment  of  the  influence  of  labor  organi- 
zations, and  it  is  generally  true  that  every  Socialist 
will,  when  pressed  for  a  definition,  make  similar 

*  Spargo,  Socialism,  p.  201.    Cf.  Cohen,  op.  cit.,  p.  37. 

•  Unionism  and  Socialism,  p.  33. 


8o  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

reservations.  Except,  then,  as  the  truism  that  the 
minimum  of  subsistence  must  in  the  long  run  form 
the  lower  limit  of  wages,  the  "  iron  law  "  is  fast 
ceasing  to  figure  in  the  Socialist  vocabulary. 

The  Socialist  claim  as  to  the  existence  of  surplus 
value  does  not  depend  of  necessity  upon  the  Marxian 
labor  theory.!  Hobson  evolves  a  surplus  value  made 
up  of  varying  elements;  and  entrepreneur's  profits, 
in  so  far  as  these  are  distinct  from  insurance,  interest, 
and  wages  of  ability,  may  be  identified  with  the  sur- 
plus value  of  Marx.^ 

The  distribution  of  the  annual  product  in  the 
United  States  bears  out  roughly  the  hypothesis  as- 
sumed by  Marx,  about  60%  going  to  labor  of  all 
kinds  and  40%  to  capital  and  entrepreneurs  as  such.^ 
Says  Le  Rossignol :  — 

"  One  might  not  be  far  wrong  in  saying  that  for 
every  dollar  paid  to  the  wage-earner,  another  dollar 
goes  to  the  capitalist  in  the  form  of  rent,  interest, 
and  profits."  * 

Whether  this  approximate  40%  may  be  termed  sur- 
plus value  in  the  strictly  Marxian  sense  depends, 
aside  from  the  matter  of  entrepreneur's  profits  noted 
above,  upon  the  Socialist  claim  as  to  the  unproduc- 
tivity  of  capital.  If  labor  has  created  the  whole 
value,  then  Marx  is  right  and  a  large  share  has  been 
mulcted  from  the  worker;  but,  if  capital  is  a  really 
creative  agent  in  industry,  the  present  distribution 
must  be  granted  as  a  necessary  consequence  of  the 
private  ownership  of  capital.    The  question  then  be- 

^  Spargo,  Karl  Marx,  p.  328. 

'  Economics  of  Distrib.,  p.  35-?,  seq. 

*  Spahr,  p.  120;    Prof.  John  B.  Clark. 

*  P.  35,  op.  cit. 


OF  THE    PRESENT   DAY  8i 

comes,  not,  "Is  the  profit  of  the  capitalist  a  sur- 
plus value  extracted  solely  from  the  product  of 
labor?  "  but,  "  Is  there  social  advantage  in  the  pri- 
vate ownership  of  capital,  which  has  the  power  to 
create  value  without  exertion  on  the  part  of  its 
owner?  " 

As  has  already  been  noted,  the  controversies  as 
to  Marxian  theory  in  the  United  States  are  seldom 
based  upon  differences  of  interpretation,  still  more 
rarely  upon  propositions  of  revision,  but  usually  upon 
the  problem  as  to  the  place  of  theory  in  the  Socialist 
movement.  The  discussion  seldom  threatens  the 
preaching  of  economic  determinism  or  the  class 
struggle,  as  these  doctrines,  while  acknowledged  by 
all  as  the  basis  of  Socialism,  can  easily  be  presented 
concretely  to  a  working-class  audience.  The  surplus 
value  theory,  on  the  other  hand,  except  in  the  form 
just  mentioned,  is  realized  by  many  members  of 
the  party  to  be  non-essential  to  scientific  Social- 
ism, as  well  as  most  diflScult  of  comprehension  by 
a  mind  unused  to  philosophical  subtleties.  Victor 
Berger,  the  constructivist,  is  one  of  those  who  advo- 
cate the  relegation  of  theory  to  the  scholars  of  the 
movement;  Boudin,  on  the  other  hand,  who  repre- 
sents a  certain  section  among  New  York  Socialists, 
insists  upon  sound  theory  as  a  prerequisite  for  sound 
action,  and  recommends  the  pure  Marxian  doctrines 
for  propaganda  in  both  the  public  meeting  and  the 
party  press. ^ 

To  sum  up  the  chapter:  American  Socialists  usu- 
ally ignore  the  labor  theory  of  value  in  their  plat- 
forms and  propaganda,  but  they  have  never  repu- 

»  L.  B.  Boudin,  N.  Y.  Call,  Feb.  5,  April  12,  1910. 


82  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

diated  it,  and  in  their  doctrinal  writings  go  no  further 
than  to  modify  it  in  unessential  points;  the  iron  law 
of  wages,  on  the  other  hand,  is  denied  by  careful 
Socialists;  the  general  contention  that  the  capitalist 
class  receives  in  the  form  of  interest  and  profits  a 
surplus  value  representing  the  difference  between  the 
wages  and  the  product  constitutes  a  conspicuous  part 
of  Socialist  propaganda,  being  defended  less  by  the- 
ory than  by  citations  of  the  facts  of  industry. 

The  American  Socialist  Party,  then,  is  Marxian 
in  its  refusal  to  repudiate  the  labor  theory  of  value, 
but  for  practical  purposes  it  substitutes  for  the  ab- 
stract doctrine  a  concrete  statement  as  to  the  relation 
of  wages  and  profit.  The  tendency  thus  indicated 
is  vigorously  opposed  by  certain  Socialists  of  influ- 
ence, and  it  is  in  the  general  controversy  as  to  the 
place  of  theory  in  the  movement,  rather  than  in  any 
material  differences  as  to  interpretation  or  revision, 
that  the  pure  Marxian  doctrines  are  a  matter  of  dis- 
cussion among  American  Socialists  to-day. 

It  can  hardly  be  gainsaid  that  in  their  very  refusal 
to  lay  stress  upon  theory  the  majority  of  the  Ameri- 
can party  are  in  accord  with  the  spirit  of  Marx  as 
shown  in  his  own  life  and  in  such  utterances  as  his 
letter  on  the  Gotha  program.     Says  Spargo :  — 

"  Marx  was  far  from  adopting  the  doctrinaire  atti- 
tude common  to  many  of  his  disciples.  His  aim  was 
to  create  a  powerful  movement  of  the  workers,  not 
a  cult  or  sect  bound  to  fixed  dogmas."  ^ 

We  must  bear  in  mind,  moreover,  that,  even  on 
the  theoretical  side,  it  is  not  upon  the  pure  economics 

*  John  Spargo,  Karl  Marx,  His  Life  and  Work,  p.  278. 


OF  THE    PRESENT  DAY  83 

of  Capital,  but  upon  the  economic  interpretation, 
class  struggle,  and  break-down  doctrines  of  the  Com- 
munist  Manifesto,  combined  with  a  criticism  of  the 
concrete  facts  of  industry,  that  the  Socialist  move- 
ment is  consciously  based  in  this  country. 


CHAPTER   VII 

THE   THEORY   OF    CRISES 

The  national  program  of  the  Socialist  Party  con- 
alns  the  following  paragraphs :  — 

"  In  spite  of  the  organization  of  trusts,  pools,  and 
combinations,  the  capitalists  are  powerless  to  regu- 
late production  for  social  ends.  Industries  are 
largely  conducted  in  a  planless  manner.  Through 
periods  of  feverish  activity  the  strength  and  health 
of  the  workers  are  mercilessly  used  up,  and  during 
periods  of  enforced  idleness  the  workers  are  fre- 
quently reduced  to  starvation. 

"  The  climaxes  of  this  system  of  production  are 
the  regularly  recurring  Industrial  depressions  and 
crises  which  paralyze  the  nation  every  fifteen 
or   twenty   years."  ^ 

As  In  the  Communist  Manifesto,  the  capitalist 
system  is  given  sole  responsibility  for  the  industrial 
and  commercial  crisis.  Unlike  the  Communist  Mani- 
festo, however,  the  Socialist  Party  here  makes  the 
crisis  depend  wholly  upon  the  general  doctrine 
worked  out  by  Engels  of  the  planlessness  of  capital- 
ist production.  Ignoring  completely  the  elaborate  ad- 
ditional theory  of  the  special  cause  of  overproduction 
due  to  the  enforced  abstinence  of  the  laborers.^ 

*  Com.  Man,,  p.  i6;  Engels,  Socialism,  Utopian  and  Scientific,  p. 


AMERICAN    SOCIALISM  85 

In  the  unofficial  utterances  of  the  Socialist  press 
we  find  the  attitude  of  the  platform  borne  out.  The 
New  York  Call  gives  the  following  cause  for  the 
crisis :  — 

"  the  stupendous  development  of  the  productive 
forces  of  society,  which  have  remained  under  pri- 
vate ownership  and  control;  the  fact  that  goods  are 
produced,  not  for  the  use  of  the  producers,  but  for 
sale  —  often  for  distant  markets,  the  enormous  ex- 
tension of  the  markets,  both  at  home  and  abroad, 
so  that  it  has  become  impossible  for  private  interests 
to  have  a  clear  view  of  their  needs  and  requirements, 
and  the  total  absence  of  any  regulation  by  society 
over  its  productive  forces,  the  prevalence  of  an 
anarchy  in  production,  so  that  one  branch  of  pro- 
duction may  be  overproducing  while  another  branch 
of  production  may  be  under-producing."  ^ 

There  are  but  few  American  leaders  who  still 
include  the  special  explanation  of  Marx  and  Rod- 
bertus  In  their  propaganda,  while  some  Socialists, 
including  W.  J.  Ghent  and  Wm.  English  Walling, 
refuse  to  give  it  a  place  any  longer  in  the  doctrine 
of  scientific  Socialism.  Although  Spargo,  in  his 
propaganda  book,  Common  Sense  of  Socialism^  gives 
briefly  the  entire  Marxian  theory.  In  his  more  scien- 
tific work.  Socialism,  his  only  mention  of  the  crisis 
is  to  note  that  Owen  agrees  with  the  Marxists  In 
his  explanation  of  it.^ 

Robert  Hunter  quotes  from  Engels  a  descriptive 
paragraph  in  which  the  crisis  is  explained  chiefly  by 
the  general  principle  of  anarchy  in  production,  and 

*  N.  Y.  Call,  Aug.  13,  1909. 

'  Spargo,  Common  Sense  of  Socialism,  p.  76;  Socialism,  p.  34-36. 


86  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

devotes  his  own  following  discussion  entirely  to  that 
principle.^ 

Hillquit  ignores  the  subject  of  crises  altogether  in 
his  recent  book,  while  in  his  minority  report  on  the 
platform  and  in  his  report  to  the  International  So- 
cialist Bureau  in  1908  he  assigns  the  cause  of  the 
crisis  generally  to  the  present  planlessness  of  pro- 
duction and  inequity  of  distribution.^  In  the  result- 
ing discussion  of  the  national  committee  a  member 
so  far  modifies  primitive  Marxism  as  to  make  the 
statement:  "  Each  and  every  panic  that  has  occurred 
has  not  the  same  basis."  ^ 

An  explanation  of  this  modern  departure  from 
the  classical  theory  is  given  by  Lucien  Sanial,  the 
veteran  statistician,  who  has  long  been  the  acknowl- 
edged authority  on  the  crisis  among  American  So- 
cialists. According  to  Mr.  Sanial,  the  industrial 
crisis,  caused  by  overproduction,  was  a  phenomenon 
of  the  competitive  stage  of  capitalism.  Marx's  the- 
ory was  a  valid  explanation,  therefore,  of  all  crises 
until  1880.  Since  that  time  we  have  entered  upon 
the  stage  of  concentration  in  capitalism,  when  the 
cause  of  the  crisis  is  no  longer  industrial,  but  com- 
mercial and  financial.  The  investigator  must  now 
seek  for  the  factors  which  in  the  course  of  economic 
evolution  have  so  developed  as  to  modify  the  finan- 
cial and  commercial  circumstances;  he  will  then  find 
only  a  partial  and  constantly  less  adequate  explana- 
tion of  each  successive  crisis  in  the  overproduction 
theory  of  Marx. 

The  entire  Marxian  theory  still  appears  in  a  few 
propaganda    volumes,    such    as    Leffingwell's   Easy 

^  Socialists  at  Work,  p.  i6o. 

'  Weekly  Bull.,  Feb.  15  and  22,  Mar.  7,  1908. 


OF  THE   PRESENT   DAY  87 

Lessons  in  Socialism.^  Untermann,  also,  in  Marx- 
tan  Economics^  while  analyzing  the  crisis  upon  the 
basis  of  industrial  anarchy,  includes  the  following 
statement  of  the  overproduction  theory :  — 

"  On  the  other  hand,  the  keeping  of  wages  at  the 
lowest  level  of  subsistence  threatens  periodically  to 
wreck  the  entire  capitalist  system,  because  the  work- 
ing people  are  the  principal  consumers,  and  they 
cannot  begin  to  absorb  the  immense  quantity  of  goods 
made  by  them  as  the  productivity  of  labor  increases, 
for  the  simple  reason  that  their  wages,  even  if  per- 
manently above  the  average  .  .  .  are  an  equivalent 
for  but  a  small  part  of  the  total  value  of  the  social 
product."  ^ 

Among  the  present-day  Americans  to  place  em- 
phasis upon  the  overproduction  explanation  are  L.  B. 
Boudin,  R.  R.  La  Monte,  and  Gaylord  Wilshire. 
The  first  of  these  writers,  taking  the  opposite  view 
from  Mr.  Sanial,  contends  that,  although  the  anarchy 
of  production  is  being  so  modified  as  to  render  each 
crisis  less  acute,  though  more  lasting,  than  the  pre- 
vious one,  yet  the  difficulty  of  overproduction  can 
never  be  overcome  under  capitalism,  but  only  tem- 
porarily checked  by  the  imperialist  conquest  of  for- 
eign markets.^ 

Mr.  Wilshire  has  elevated  the  crisis  theory  into 
a  cardinal  doctrine,  and  exults  over  the  fact  that  he 
predicted  the  catastrophe  of  1907  at  least  a  year  in 
advance,  when  the  general  press  was  loud  in  its  proc- 
lamation of  prosperity.^  When  the  blow  fell,  that 
writer  announced  the  beginning  of  the  final  struggle 

'  Op.  cit.,  p.  13.  *  Op.  dt.,  p.  234. 

*  Op.  cit.,  p.  233,  seq.  *  Wilshire  Editorials,  p.  254. 


88  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

of  capitalism;  but  both  he  and  Mr.  La  Monte  are 
now  pointing  to  the  vast  military  expenditures  of 
the  world  as  the  artificial  outlet  for  industrial  over- 
production which,  by  affording  the  "  outside  stimu- 
lus" mentioned  by  Professor  Veblen,  may  bring  the 
present  system  a  new  though  temporary  lease  of 
life.i 

It  must  not  be  forgotten  that  the  majority  of 
American  Socialists,  while  ignoring  the  special  theory 
of  overproduction  due  to  the  exploitation  of  the 
workers,  are  not  repudiating  it,  but  emphasizing  in 
its  stead  the  doctrine  of  which  it  forms  a  part,  that 
of  the  anarchy  of  production.  Those  who,  with  Mr. 
Sanial,  seek  a  new  explanation  for  each  recurrence 
of  the  disaster,  look  for  these  solutions  in  the  differ- 
ent phases  of  capitalist  anarchy. 

That  these  differences  of  opinion  are  of  negligible 
consequence  to  American  Socialism  is  indicated  by 
the  fact  that  ideas  upon  the  crisis  correspond  to  none 
of  the  tactical  divisions  of  the  party.  Ghent  and 
Walling,  who  represent  the  opposite  categories  of 
constructivist  and  revolutionist,  of  which  more  here- 
after, have  laid  aside  the  Marxian  theory  in  this 
matter,  while  La  Monte  and  Wilshire,  two  others 
whose  notions  rarely  coincide,  are  its  vigorous  sup- 
porters. The  Party  press  and  lecture  platform  are 
entirely  free  from  controversy  on  the  subject,  and 
there  is  apparent  a  general  readiness  to  leave  the  de- 
tails of  the  overproduction  doctrine  to  private  judg- 
ment, while  accepting  the  explanation  of  the  crisis 
from  industrial  anarchy  as  sufficient  for  propaganda 
purposes. 

^  La  Monte  in  N.  Y.  Call,  Aug.  17,  1909;  see  also  Veblen,  Theory  of 
Business  Enterprise,  p.  254,  393. 


OF   THE    PRESENT   DAY  89 

With  a  few  exceptions,  then,  the  American  So- 
cialists seem  to  have  travelled  far  toward  a  readiness 
to  abandon  the  explanation  of  the  crisis  by  means 
of  a  special  theory  of  overproduction  for  the  general 
Marxian  doctrine  of  Industrial  anarchy.  While  cer- 
tain writers  pass  over  the  whole  subject,  others,  in- 
cluding the  framers  of  the  national  platform,  em- 
phasize only  the  more  comprehensive  explanation, 
while  still  others  deny  the  adequacy  of  the  overpro- 
duction theory  for  the  present  stage  of  economic  de- 
velopment. In  spite  of  the  differences  of  opinion 
among  Socialists,  the  crisis  theory  Is  not  a  subject 
of  dispute  In  the  American  party.  In  so  far  as  the 
anarchy  of  capitalist  production  is  accepted  as  the 
general  cause  of  the  financial  and  commercial  crisis, 
moreover,  there  Is  no  substantial  ground  for  dis- 
agreement among  Socialists  and  non-socialists.  The 
chief  point  of  difference  is  as  to  the  degree  of  this 
Industrial  anarchy,  its  inherence  In  the  present  sys- 
tem, and  the  practicability  of  putting  a  stop  to  it 
without  undue  restriction  of  the  Individual. 


CHAPTER  VIII 

THE  BREAKDOWN  OF  THE  CAPITALIST  SYSTEM 

The  culmination  of  the  Marxian  economics  is  in 
the  final  breakdown  of  the  capitalist  system.  As  the 
economic  interpretation  of  history  and  the  class  strug- 
gle become  distinctively  Socialist  doctrines  only  when 
employed  to  prove  the  existence  of  destructive  forces 
within  the  present  society,  so  the  analysis  of  produc- 
tion in  the  surplus  value  and  crisis  theories  has  been 
applied  to  the  support  of  scientific  socialism,  not  be- 
cause of  any  ethical  principles  therein  contained,  but 
because  this  analysis  brings  abstract  economics  to 
the  support  of  history  in  demonstrating  these  catas- 
trophic tendencies. 

As  a  philosophical  dogma,  the  inevitable  break- 
down of  capitalism  depends  upon  the  Hegelian  evo- 
lutionary theory  that  every  institution  contains  within 
itself  the  seeds  of  its  own  dissolution.  The  extent  to 
which  the  Hegelian  doctrine  has  penetrated  the  work- 
ing class  movement  of  America  is  shown  in  the  fol- 
lowing passage  from  an  address  of  Eugene  V. 
Debs:  — 

*'  Underlying  society  there  are  great  material 
forces  which  are  in  operation  all  of  the  circling  hours 
of  the  day  and  night,  and  at  certain  points  in  the 
social  development  these  forces  outgrow  the  forms 


AMERICAN    SOCIALISM  91 

that  hold  them,  and  these  forms  spring  apart  and 
then  a  new  social  system  comes  into  existence  and  a 
new  era  dawns  for  the  human  race."  ^ 

As  an  economic  conclusion  the  breakdown  idea  is 
a  deduction,  according  to  the  principles  of  economic 
determinism,  from  the  observed  tendencies  of  pres- 
ent industry,  supported  by  the  analysis  of  produc- 
tion in  Marx's  pure  economics.  The  general  notion 
of  an  impending  fall  of  capitalism  is  not  confined 
wholly  to  Socialists.  Professor  Veblen  looks  forward 
to  the  decay  of  the  regime  of  business  enterprise, 
and  individualist  reformers  frequently  argue  that 
Nemesis  must  be  propitiated  by  income  and  inherit- 
ance taxes  before  doom  overtakes  our  institutions. ^ 
The  revolutionary  completeness  of  the  change,  how- 
ever, and  its  character  of  proletarian  socialization 
are  distinctive  of  the  Socialist  philosophy,  depend- 
ing directly  upon  the  Marxian  economic  theories. 

About  the  doctrine  of  breakdown,  or,  in  its  ex- 
treme form,  of  cataclysm,  center  most  of  the  attacks 
of  the  Revisionists,  the  school  of  Socialist  moderates 
before  mentioned,  who,  under  the  leadership  of  the 
German  Bernstein,  aroused  great  controversy  a  few 
years  ago  as  to  the  advisability  of  revising  the 
Marxian  theories.  While  these  are  true  Socialists 
in  their  acceptance  of  the  coming  change,  and  in  their 
deduction  of  it  from  the  principles  laid  down  by 
Marx  and  Engels,  they  take  exception  to  the  inevita- 
bility of  the  transformation,  and  hesitate  to  term  it 
a  revolution  because  of  the  implied  associations  of 
violence  and  suddenness.  The  controversy  is  of 
more  than  academic  importance  in  that  the  Revision- 

*  The  Issue,  p.  5. 

•  Veblen,  Theory  of  Business  Eoterprise,  p.  394,  seq. 


92  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

ists,  because  of  their  denial  of  the  inevitable  revolu- 
tion, tend  toward  measures  that  shall  gradually  build 
up  the  Socialist  state  under  the  forms  of  present  so- 
ciety rather  than  those  which  aim  chiefly  to  organize 
and  strengthen  the  proletariat  for  the  coming  cata- 
clysm. They  are  thus  constructive  rather  than  revo- 
lutionary in  their  tactics,  and  are  even  charged  by 
their  opponents  with  opportunism  in  attempting  to 
cooperate  with  the  political  forces  of  the  bourgeoisie. 

The  doctrine  of  inevitability  in  its  absolute  form 
is  defenseless  against  the  Revisionists.  It  must  share 
the  fate  M  the  deterministic  philosophy  of  which  it 
is  a  part,  impregnable  in  logic,  but  impossible  in  ap- 
plication. The  deadlock  of  fatalism  can  be  avoided 
only  by  the  admission  of  the  element  of  free  human 
action,  and  where  this  exists  there  can  be  no  inevita- 
bility. Marx  and  his  followers  have  recognized  this 
limitation  more  or  less,  according  as  the  policy  of 
each  has  tended  to  the  practical  or  the  doctrinaire, 
and  the  Revisionists  mark  only  the  extreme  develop- 
ment of  the  former  tendency.  The  degree  of  this 
recognition  is  to  be  found  at  the  bottom  of  all  tactical 
Socialist  divisions,  as  has  before  been  indicated. 

Both  points  of  view  are  found  in  American  Social- 
ism. The  course  of  human  thought,  says  a  writer  in 
the  New  York  Call, 

"is  not  controlled  by  politicians;  ...  its  progress 
cannot  be  checked  by  man.  Men  will  be  carried 
along  in  its  next  leap  forward  and  the  ostensible 
leaders  will  be  created  by  the  same  mysterious  forces 
that  inspired  the  movement."  ^ 

The  Appeal  to  Reason  maintains  in  similar  fashion 
that  vSocialism  is  inevitable  as  the  next  logical  form 

^  Nov.  25,  1909. 


OF  THE    PRESENT   DAY  93 

of  human  association,  and  will  come  even  if  the  So- 
cialists themselves  should  oppose  it;  and  a  national 
committeeman  pins  his  faith  to  Hegelianism,  declar- 
ing that  we  should  be  without  hope,  were  it  not  that 
the  present  system  contains  within  itself  its  own 
destruction.^ 

W.  J.  Ghent,  on  the  contrary,  designates  the  belief 
in  inevitable  catastrophe  as  "  a  fond  faith,"  and 
points  out,  as  does  Jack  London  also,  the  possibility 
of  oligarchy  rather  than  Socialism,  in  the  absence  of 
rightly  directed  action  by  the  working  class.^ 

Isador  Ladoff  writes: 

"  History  does  not  support  the  faith  of  the  Social- 
ists of  the  old  school  that  capitalism  is  bound  to  work 
out,  mechanically  so  to  speak,  its  own  destruction  and 
then  to  be  replaced  automatically  by  socialism,  even 
in  case  no  conscientious  and  conscious  endeavor  to 
work  in  that  direction  exists  on  the  part  of  the  mem- 
bers of  society."  ^ 

Spargo  opposes  especially  the  idea  of  a  sudden 
and  violent  cataclysm  often  credited  to  Marx:  — 

"  Those  who  are  familiar  with  the  writings  of 
Marx  know  that,  in  strange  contrast  with  the  funda- 
mental principles  of  that  theory  of  social  evolution 
which  he  so  well  developed,  he  lapsed  at  times  into 
the  Utopian  habit  of  predicting  the  sudden  transfor- 
mation of  society.  Capitalism  was  to  end  in  a  great 
final  *  catastrophe  '  and  the  new  order  be  born  in  the 
travail  of  a  '  social  revolution.'  "  ■* 

*  Appeal,  Mar.  23,  1907;   Weekly  Bull.,  Feb.  15,  29,  1908. 
2  Op.  cit.,  p.  151. 

*  Ghent,  Our  Benevolent  Feudalism,  p.  180;  London,  The  Iron  Heel, 
p.  xi. 

*  Socialism,  Revised  Ed.,  p.  324;  see  also  Sidelights  on  Contem- 
porary Socialism,  p.  47. 


94  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

In  general,  Socialist  opinion  is  tending  to  acknowl- 
edge the  importance  of  conscious  human  action  as  an 
element  in  the  downfall  of  capitalism.  A  National 
Committee  discussion  brings  out  the  doctrine  that 
majority  action  will  be  brought  about  not  by  economic 
necessity  alone,  but  by  the  conscious  perception  both 
of  the  necessity  and  of  the  means  of  meeting  it.^ 
The  acknowledgment  by  Marx  and  his  followers  of 
ideas  as  effective,  though  secondary  factors  in  evolu- 
tion, leads  unavoidably  to  a  modification  of  the  no- 
tion of  inevitability  by  that  of  free  will.  The  New 
York  Worker^  the  predecessor  of  the  present  New 
York  Call,  reproduced  the  well-known  effort  of  Marx 
to  harmonize  these  contradictory  elements :  — 

"  One  nation  can  and  should  learn  from  others. 
And  even  when  a  society  has  got  the  right  track  for 
the  discovery  of  the  natural  laws  of  its  movement,  it 
can  neither  clear  by  bold  leaps,  nor  remove  by  legal 
enactments,  the  obstacles  offered  by  the  successive 
phases  of  its  normal  development.  But  it  can  shorten 
and  lessen  the  birth  pangs."  ^ 

The  doctrine  of  an  automatic  cataclysm  has  found 
its  chief  support  in  the  overproduction  theory,  the 
latter  being  supposed  to  point  to  a  final  stupendous 
crisis,  when,  the  limit  to  commercial  expansion  in 
foreign  countries  having  been  reached,^  capitalism 
will  fall  by  the  weight  of  its  plethora  of  wealth. 
Boudin,  however,  refuses  even  in  his  defense  of  the 
crisis  theory  to  admit  what  he  calls  this  *'  mechanical 
conception  of  history,"  and  maintains  that  the  revo- 
lution will  come  long  before  the  impossibility  of  con- 

»  Weekly  Bull.,  May  9,  1908.  *  June  22,  1907. 

•  Leffingwell,  op.  cit.,  p.  14. 


OF  THE   PRESENT   DAY  95 

tinuing  capitalist  production  brings  on  a  physical 
catastrophe.^ 

As  the  crisis  theory  tends  to  be  relegated  to  a  sub- 
ordinate place  in  present-day  Socialism,  the  prophecy 
of  the  fall  of  capitalism  is  more  and  more  modified 
by  the  factor  of  human  choice.  Notwithstanding 
this  modification,  however,  there  is  no  retirement  by 
American  Socialists  from  the  prediction  of  economic 
necessity.  The  ultimate  downfall  of  capitalism  is  to 
be  brought  about  by  the  process  of  its  own  inevitable 
development,  through  the  influences  of  the  concentra- 
tion of  industry,  the  proletarization  of  the  middle 
classes,  and  the  increasing  exploitation  of  the 
workers. 

The  technical  side  of  the  process  appears  in  the 
concentration  of  capital,  and  it  is  in  this  form  that 
the  breakdown  of  capitalism  is  presented  in  the  So- 
cialist Party  platform. ^ 

*'  The  basis  for  such  transformation  Is  rapidly 
developing  within  present  capitalist  society.  The 
factory  system,  with  its  complex  machinery  and 
minute  division  of  labor,  is  rapidly  destroying  all 
vestiges  of  individual  production  in  manufacture. 
Modern  production  is  already  very  largely  a  collec- 
tive and  social  process.  The  great  trusts  and  monop- 
olies which  have  sprung  up  In  recent  years  have  or- 
ganized the  work  and  management  of  the  principal 
Industries  on  a  national  scale,  and  have  fitted  them 
for  collective  use  and  operation."  ^ 

The  Revisionists  direct  their  chief  criticism  against 
the  doctrines  of  concentration  and  proletarization. 

'  Op.  cit.,  p.  253.  *  Boudin,  op.  cit.,  p.  218. 

»  Nat.  Platform,  p.  4. 


96  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

With  regard  to  the  former,  they  have  alleged  that 
the  process  of  concentration,  though  existing,  is  far 
slower  than  anticipated  by  Marx,  and  that  the  small 
shop  and  farm  are  likely  to  survive  indefinitely. 

In  Marxism  versus  Socialism  Professor  Simkho- 
vitch  has  dealt  exhaustively  with  these  Revisionist 
charges.  He  has  pointed  out  that  Marx  and  Engels, 
in  common  with  most  revolutionists,  tended  to  allow 
too  little  for  the  complication  of  social  forces,  and  so 
exaggerated  the  rapidity  of  capitalist  evolution.^  In 
the  domain  of  agriculture  he  shows  that  the  moder- 
ate-sized farm  is  holding  its  own  in  both  Europe  and 
America,  and  is  likely  to  continue  doing  so  until 
the  limit  of  intensive  cultivation  has  been  reached,^ 
Forty  years  after  Marx's  prediction,  moreover,  the 
small  industry  still  survives,  and  we  see  strong 
counter-forces  in  industry  opposed  to  centralization.^ 
Many  industries  prosper  best  on  a  small  scale,  min- 
istering to  local  needs  or  specialized  tastes,  and  these 
tend  to  multiply  with  education  and  progress  in  the 
arts;  the  bonanza  farms,  so  widely  heralded  by  the 
last  generation  of  Socialists,  are  acknowledged  to  be 
adapted  only  to  special  conditions;  the  twentieth 
century  force,  electricity,  by  its  capacity  of  trans- 
mission to  numberless  minor  establishments,  may 
prove  important  in  checking  centralization;  and 
lastly,  the  recent  awakening  of  the  people  to  the  dan- 
gers of  concentration  has  already,  by  railroad  regu- 
lation, anti-trust  laws,  and  other  measures  of  govern- 
ment control,  begun  to  turn  the  current  back  again 
toward  competition. 

The  specific  claims  of  the  Revisionists  are  no  longer 

1  Op.  cit.,  XXIII,  p.  211;  see  also  Sparpo,  Karl  Marx,  p.  329. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  669.  »  Ibid.,  p.  660. 


OF  THE    PRESENT   DAY  97 

denied  by  the  more  scientific  American  Socialists. 
The  prophecy  of  Capital  as  to  the  annihilation  of  the 
peasant  has  given  way  to  an  acknowledgment  of  the 
persistence  of  the  small  farmer,  with  a  far-reaching 
effect,  to  be  shown  later,  upon  the  tactics  of  the 
movement.  Boudin  makes  no  defense  of  Marx  In 
his  evident  miscalculation  of  the  rapidity  of  concen- 
tration, saying  only  that  Marx's  opinion  on  the  sub- 
ject was  never  explicitly  stated,  and  if  so  would  form 
no  integral  part  of  his  system.^ 

Spargo  admits  the  increase  of  petty  industries,  and 
the  survival  of  the  small  shopkeeper;  and  speaks  of 
the  Socialist  who  "  opposes  the  propaganda  of  Social- 
ism among  farmers,  because  he  is  obsessed  by  the 
mistaken  generalization  of  Marx  that  the  small 
farmer  is  rapidly  becoming  extinct,  In  spite  of  all  the 
evidence  to  the  contrary."  -  A.  M.  Simons  and  Carl 
Thompson  also  follow  Kautsky  and  Vandervelde  In 
giving  a  long  lease  of  life  to  the  small  farmer.^ 

On  the  other  hand,  there  Is  no  apparent  tendency 
among  American  Socialists  to  acknowledge  the  need 
of  revision  In  the  prophecy  of  concentration.  The 
possible  miscalculation  of  time  on  Marx's  part  does 
not  affect  the  statement  of  the  tendency,  and  the  spo- 
radic survival  of  the  small  establishment  does  not 
disprove  the  fact  of  general  concentration.  In  the 
expression,  "  centralization  of  the  means  of  produc- 
tion and  socialization  of  labor,"  Marx  does  not,  ac- 
cording to  his  modern  followers,  signify  the  absolute 


1  Op.  cit.,  p.  192. 

*  Spargo,  Sidelights,  etc.,  p.  30;  Socialism,  Revised,  p.  I2i;  see  also 
Karl  Marx,  p.  351,  and  The  Substance  of  Socialism,  p.  85. 

'  Simons,  The  American  Farmer,  p.  8,  2nd  Ed.;  Thompson,  op. 
cit.,  pp.  64,  66;  Kautsky,  Die  Agrarfrage,  p.  440;  Vandervelde,  op.  cit., 
pp.  78-79. 


98  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

disappearance  of  the  small  industry,  but  rather  such 
a  tendency  toward  concentration  of  capital  in  unified 
systems  and  such  a  massing  of  laborers  in  interde- 
pendent production  as  is  incompatible  with  the  pri- 
vate ownership  and  control  of  industry.^ 

Whatever  may  be  the  present  tendencies  in  Europe, 
the  apparent  course  of  industrial  development  in  this 
continent  is  such  as  to  confirm  the  American  Socialist 
in  his  adherence  to  the  doctrine  of  concentration  in 
the  sense  just  described.  Our  statistics  show  that, 
while  the  independent  establishment  has  by  no  means 
disappeared,  the  decentralizing  forces  have  failed 
so  far  to  counteract  those  in  the  opposite  direction. 

"  The  method  of  presentation  by  averages,"  says 
the  1 2th  Census,  "  which  includes  all  the  small  estab- 
lishments with  the  great  ones,  fails  to  give  any  true 
conception  of  the  extent  to  which  the  total  value  of 
the  product  comes  from  a  comparatively  small  num- 
ber of  establishments,  the  operatives  of  which  are 
numbered  by  the  thousand.  The  tendency  toward 
concentration  appears  to  be  most  marked  in  the  iron 
and  steel  industry.  .  .  .  During  the  last  half-century, 
the  average  iron  and  steel  establishment  has  in- 
creased its  capital  iSfold,  the  number  of  wage- 
earners  5 fold,  the  amount  paid  in  wages  i2fold,  and 
the  value  of  the  product  27fold.  .  .  .  On  the  other 
hand,  there  are  certain  industries  for  which  the  sta- 
tistics reveal  no  such  tendency  toward  concentra- 
tion," such  as  the  flouring  and  grist  mill  industry. 
"  It  is  a  fact  well  within  public  knowledge,  however, 
that  the  flour  milling  industry  shows  as  pronounced  a 
tendency  toward  concentration  into  large  establish- 
ments as  does  any  other  branch  of  manufacture."  ^ 

»  Marx,  Capital,  Vol.  I.  p.  789.     *  12th  Census,  Vol.  VII.  p.  Ixxii. 


OF  THE   PRESENT   DAY  99 

While  it  is  true  that  in  1900  about  one-half  the 
industrial  establishments  of  the  United  States  con- 
tained less  than  5  employes  each,  yet  it  is  equally 
undeniable  that  over  one-half  the  workers  were  em- 
ployed in  establishments  with  more  than  fifty  others, 
and  the  statistics  from  the  point  of  view  of  the 
worker  show  two  means,  one  in  establishments  num- 
bering 5  to  20,  but  the  other  in  those  numbering  loi 
to  250  wage-earners.^  While,  moreover,  the  number 
of  industrial  establishments  increased  from  1890  to 
1900  nearly  twice  as  fast  as  the  number  of  wage- 
earners,  this  period  was  an  exceptional  one,  for  no 
other  period  since  1870  shows  a  greater  percentage 
of  increase  for  the  former  than  for  the  latter,  and 
from  1900  to  1905  the  growth  of  establishments  was 
only  about  14  ^s  rapid  as  that  of  the  workers.^  At 
the  latter  date  71.6%  of  the  wage-earners  were  em- 
ployed in  establishments  averaging  162  employes 
and  only  9.6%  in  those  establishments  termed  In  the 
census  "  inconsiderable,"  —  with  a  gross  product 
under  $20,000.^ 

We  must  go  farther,  however,  than  statistics  as  to 
the  number  of  industrial  and  agricultural  establish- 
ments In  examining  the  Marxian  claim  of  centraliza- 
tion and  socialization.  "  The  constantly  diminish- 
ing number  of  the  magnates  of  capital  "  is  the  item 
justly  italicized  by  Professor  Simkhovitch,  and  the 
magnitude  of  control,  rather  than  establishment,  is 
the  true  criterion  of  centralization  in  the  Marxian 
sense.*    As  the  same  writer  brings  out,  the  policy  of 

*  Twelfth  Census,  Manufactures,'pt.  I,  p.  Ixxiii;  Ibid.,  Vol.  VII.  pt.  i, 
p.  Ixxiii. 

*  Special  Census  of  Manufactures,  1905,  pt.  I,  p.  xxxvi. 
•*  Ibid.,  p.  cxiv. 

*  Op.  cit.,  Vol.  XXIII.  p.  681. 


loo  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

the  trust  is  frequently  to  maintain  the  smaller  indus- 
trial organizations  in  nominal  independence;  but 
centralization  of  control  by  the  magnates  of  capital 
is  not  thereby  hindered.  The  question  is  not,  "  Has 
the  number  of  shops  manufacturing  steel  or  cigars 
increased  either  absolutely  or  relatively? "  but, 
"  Has  the  number  of  magnates  controlling  the  steel 
and  tobacco  industries  increased  relatively  to  the 
growth  of  population  and  production?  "  While  the 
former  question  is  of  importance  as  affecting  the  or- 
ganization of  the  working-class,  the  latter  alone  re- 
lates directly  to  the  concentration  of  capitalistic 
control. 

The  statistics  as  to  corporate  control  in  the  United 
States,  though  incomplete,  bring  out  clearly  the  rapid 
growth  of  the  concentration  of  this  control  in  the 
industrial  combination.  While  American  Socialists 
are  strongly  influenced  by  such  unofficial  statistics  as 
those  of  Moody  and  Sereno  Pratt,  they  find  these 
figures  generally  harmonious  with  those  of  the  offi- 
cial census. 

Professor  Seligman  writes :  — 

"  According  to  the  census  of  1900  there  were  185 
combinations,  representing  2040  plants  and  turning 
out  products  of  the  value  of  $1,667,350,  a  little  over 
14%  of  the  total  industrial  output  of  the  United 
States.  But  since  1900  the  movement  has  progressed 
rapidly.  In  1900  there  were  16  combinations  each 
with  a  capital  of  over  $50,000,000  and  with  an  ag- 
gregate capital  of  $1,231,000,000.  In  1907,  .  .  . 
not  only  were  there  27  such  combinations  with  an 
aggregate  capital  3  times  as  great,  but  a  single 
combination  now  had  a  larger  capital  than  the  16 


OF  THE    PRESENT   DAY  loi 

combinations,  and  about  ^  as  large  as  all  the  185 
combinations  in  1900."^ 

Furthermore,  while  Socialists  in  America  have 
yielded  the  persistence  of  the  small  farmer,  they  are 
not  ready  to  see  in  this  circumstance  the  survival  of 
the  independent  yeoman.  As  Professor  Seligman 
points  out,  the  recent  decrease  in  farm  areas  may  be 
less  indicative  of  the  continuance  of  the  small  farmer 
than  of  the  increase  of  land  values  which  causes  a 
given  capital  to  represent  a  constantly  diminishing 
acreage.^  Less  than  }^  the  American  farms  in  1890 
were  owned  clear  of  encumbrance;  and,  while  we 
have  no  parallel  figures  for  1900,  we  know  that  be- 
tween the  two  census  years  the  percentage  of  farms 
operated  by  owners  or  part  owners  fell  from  71.6 
to  64.7,  the  complete  owners,  subject  to  mortgage  or 
otherwise,  numbering  at  the  later  date  only  S4-9% 
of  the  whole  number  of  farmers.^  Furthermore,  the 
present-day  farmer  is  seldom,  as  formerly,  the  seller 
of  a  finished  product,  for,  except  in  the  case  of  the 
suburban  market-gardener,  he  must  always  depend 
on  the  powers  of  transportation,  storage,  and  the 
stock  market  for  the  time  and  place  utility  without 
which  his  crops  are  worthless.  As  in  the  case  of 
capital,  the  question  is  not,  "  Is  the  number  of  farms 
decreasing?  "  but,  "  Is  agricultural  capital  controlled 
by  a  smaller  or  a  larger  number  of  men  than 
formerly?  " 

As  a  result  of  the  indications  thus  apparent,  the 
American  Socialist  writers  are  unanimous  in  their 
declaration  of  a  tendency  toward  concentration. 

^  Principles  of  Economics,  p.  342.  ^  Ibid.,  p.  336. 

'  Comp.  of  nth  Census,  p.  1063;  Ibid.,  pt.  Ill,  p.  590;  12th  Census, 
Vol.  v.,  Agric,  pt.  I,  p.  Ixvi. 

LIBRARY 
UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORWA 


102  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

Hillquit  writes :  — 

"  In  the  merciless  war  of  competition  the  big  cap- 
italist enterprises  are  gradually  extinguishing  the 
smaller  independent  concerns.  Our  *  national ' 
wealth  and  principal  industries  concentrate  in  the 
hands  of  ever  fewer  combines."  ^ 

Closely  connected  with  the  doctrine  of  the  concen- 
tration of  capital  is  that  of  the  proletarization  of  the 
population. 

"  Here,"  according  to  Professor  Simkhovitch,  "  is 
the  core  of  Marxian  socialism.  Not  only  is  the 
middle  class  gradually  being  wiped  out,  but  the  lesser 
capitalists  are  gradually  being  reduced  to  proletarian 
existences,  swallowed  up  by  the  greater  capitalists."  ^ 

The  Revisionists  attack  this  doctrine  along  with 
that  of  concentration,  supporting  it  by  statistics  as  to 
the  increase  in  the  number  of  moderate  incomes,  by 
the  contention  already  noted  as  to  the  survival  of  the 
small  farm  and  industry,  and  by  the  fact  that  the  cor- 
poration, while  a  form  of  concentration,  produces  a 
counter-force  in  the  dissemination  of  income.^ 

As  a  rule  the  American  Socialist,  instead  of  dis- 
puting these  statements,  denies  their  applicability  to 
Marx's  contention.  It  appears  that  there  is  a  gen- 
eral misunderstanding  between  the  Revisionists  and 
the  Marxians  on  the  subject  of  proletarization.  The 
proletariat  is  defined  by  Marx  and  Engels  as  a  class 
of  laborers  who  live  only  so  long  as  they  can  find 
work,  and  who  find  work  only  so  long  as  their  labor 

'  Socialism  in  Theory  and  Practice,  p.  6. 

«  Op.  cit.,  Vol.  XXIII.  D.  680. 

•  Bernstein,  quoted  ibid.,  p.  686,  688,  etc 


OF   THE    PRESENT   DAY  103 

Increases  capital.^  Not  the  quality  of  poverty,  there- 
fore, absolute  or  relative,  but  that  of  dependence 
upon  employment  by  others  is  the  mark  of  proletari- 
zation.  The  capitalist  is  clearly  the  possessor  of 
capital,  that  which  allows  him  an  income  without 
labor  on  his  part.  The  middle  class  must  therefore 
consist  of  those  who  are  neither  possessors  of  capital 
nor  dependent  upon  employment,  —  namely,  the  in- 
dependent craftsmen,  farmers,  and  professional  per- 
sons, —  and  those  who  are  both  possessors  of  capital 
and  dependent  upon  employment,  this  class  includ- 
ing many  of  the  better  paid  employes.  As  certain  of 
the  latter,  such  as  the  workman  with  a  small  bank 
account,  have  a  preponderating  interest  on  the  prole- 
tarian side,  and  others,  such  as  the  salaried  man  who 
will  soon  retire  on  his  investments,  naturally  range 
themselves  with  the  capitalists,  only  those  whose  in- 
comes are  approximately  balanced  between  Interest 
and  wages  may  be  counted  with  the  independent 
workers  as  of  the  middle  class.  This  class  is  dis- 
tinguished, therefore,  not  by  the  amount  of  its  In- 
come, but  by  Its  source,  in  the  same  way  that  the 
proletariat  is  marked  not  by  poverty  but  by  depen- 
dence upon  employment. 

The  Revisionist  usually  approaches  the  subject 
through  income  statistics,  showing  either  that  as  a 
result  of  the  corporation  there  exist  many  small  cap- 
italist incomes,  or  that,  owing  in  part  doubtless  to 
the  Increased  requirements  of  technical  training,  the 
professional  income  Is  often  large.  Such  statistics, 
however,  have  no  direct  bearing  upon  the  question 
at  Issue,  which  is  not,  "  Is  the  proportion  of  mod- 
erate Incomes  Increasing  or  decreasing?  "  but,  "  Is 

*  Com.  Man.,  p.  i6. 


I04  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

the  proportion  increasing  or  decreasing  of  those  in- 
comes which  are  derived  either  from  independent 
labor  or  from  capital  and  wages  in  equal  por- 
tions? " 

The  question  of  fact  cannot  be  settled  until  we 
have  adequate  statistics  recognizing  categories  equiv- 
alent to  capitalist,  middle  class,  and  proletarian. 
The  only  available  estimates  at  present  are  those  of 
the  American  Marxian  Lucien  Sanial;  and  these 
seem  to  support  the  Revisionist  position  in  showing  a 
slight  though  steady  percentage  of  increase  in  both 
capitalist  and  middle  classes  from  1870  to  1890,  with 
a  corresponding  decrease  in  the  proletariat.  A  de- 
cidedly opposite  tendency  which  appears  for  the 
next  decade  is  due  at  least  in  part  to  a  change  in 
classification.^  Although  these  figures  are  based 
carefully  upon  United  States  census  reports,  the 
deficiencies  of  the  latter  in  classification  render  the 
conclusions  confessedly  approximate.  The  present 
census  is  making  a  decided  improvement  in  its  details 
as  to  "  employers,"  "  workers,"  and  "  working  on 
own  account,"  but  these  should  be  supplemented  by 
information  as  to  capitalists,  as  this  class  is  not 
synonymous  with  that  of  employers.  Until  such 
series  are  at  hand,  the  discussion  of  the  proletariza- 
tion  of  the  middle  class  must  be  without  a  firm  basis. 

The  third  economic  force  working  for  the  fall  of 
capitalism  is  the  increasing  exploitation  of  the 
workers.  The  crude  form  of  the  doctrine,  known  as 
the  theory  of  increasing  misery,  and  predicting  the 
progressive  pauperization  of  the  masses  until  rebel- 
lion is  inevitable,  is  repudiated  by  the  Socialist  leaders 
of  both  Europe  and  America,  and  by  them  for  Marx 

*  Sanial,  Socialist  Almanac,  p.  ioa-104;  Socialist  Poster,  No.  I. 


OF  THE    PRESENT   DAY  105 

and  Engels.^  The  attributing  of  the  extreme  form 
of  the  doctrine  to  the  Marxians  is  doubtless  due  in 
part  to  the  misunderstanding  before  noted,  that  of 
taking  poverty,  rather  than  exploitation  by  an  em- 
ployer, as  the  characteristic  quality  of  the  proletariat. 
Marx  made  clear,  however,  as  early  as  1849,  that 
even  under  a  regime  of  rising  real  wages  the  ratio 
of  exploitation  would,  according  to  his  theory,  still 
increase,  and  that  the  progressive  degradation  of  the 
proletariat  would  be  due  not  to  poverty  but  to  a  grad- 
ual widening  of  the  social  gulf  and  strengthening  of 
the  dependence  of  labor  upon  capital.^ 

"  It  follows,  therefore,"  says  Marx  later  on, 
"  that  in  proportion  as  capital  accumulates,  the  lot 
of  the  laborer,  be  his  payment  high  or  low,  must 
grow  worse."  ^ 

Except,  accordingly,  in  a  toning  down  of  their  fig- 
ures of  speech,  the  American  Socialists,  in  substitut- 
ing increasing  exploitation  for  increasing  misery, 
have  not  modified  the  theories  of  Marx.  Hillquit 
expresses  as  follows  the  doctrine  as  held  to-day: 

"  The  condition  of  this  favored  class  of  the  work- 
ing population  is  one  of  absolute  improvement  but 
of  relative  deterioration.  And  side  by  side  with  the 
more  fortunate  strata  of  the  working  class  there  are 
the  large  masses  of  laborers  whose  conditions  of  life 
have  greatly  deteriorated,  absolutely  as  well  as 
relatively."  * 

^  Kautsky,  Morrow  of  the  Social  Revolution,  p.  i8;  Ensor,  op.  cit.; 
p.  187,  189;  Hillquit,  Socialism  in  Tiicory  and  Practice,  p.  6. 
^  Wage  Labor  and  Capital,  p.  l8,  19,  23. 
'  Capital,  Vol.  I.  p.  661. 
*  Hillquit,  Socialism  in  Theory  and  Practice,  p.  6. 


io6  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

The  absolute  improvement  conceded  by  Hillquit 
is  illustrated  by  Professor  Simkhovitch  in  his  statis- 
tics of  the  rise  in  nominal  and  real  wages  in  various 
countries,  and  by  T.  S.  Adams,  in  his  table  showing 
a  steady,  though  slight  decrease  in  the  average  hours 
of  labor  since  1840.^  While  there  are  not  wanting 
Socialists  to  quote  Thorold  Rogers  as  authority  that 
the  condition  of  the  workers  is  absolutely  inferior  to 
that  of  six  centuries  ago,  all  acknowledge  a  marked 
improvement  over  the  days  immediately  following 
the  industrial  revolution,  even  though  ascribing  much 
of  the  absolute  betterment  to  such  deliberately  social- 
istic measures  as  the  Factory  Acts,^ 

The  relative  deterioration  which  Hillquit  alleges 
may  be  considered  in  two  ways,  as  relative  to  the 
wealth  of  the  capitalist  class,  —  a  ratio  measuring 
roughly  from  the  Socialist  point  of  view  the  degree 
of  exploitation,  —  and  as  relative  to  the  standard  of 
living  of  the  workers  themselves. 

American  Socialists  base  their  belief  in  relative 
deterioration  in  the  former  sense  to  some  extent  upon 
such  unofficial  figures  as  those  of  Mr.  Spahr,  but 
chiefly  upon  the  statistics  of  wealth  compiled  by 
Lucien  Sanial  from  the  United  States  census  reports. 
A  comparison  of  the  estimates  of  Mr.  Sanial  in  his 
Socialist  Almanac,  based  upon  the  eleventh  census, 
and  his  Socialist  Posters,  based  upon  the  twelfth, 
shows  that  while  the  percentage  of  proletarians 
among  occupied  persons  increased  from  66.26  to  70.1 
(owing  in  part  to  a  difference  in  classification),  their 

•  Simkhovitch,  op.  cit.,  Vol.  XXIV.  p.  258,  seq.;  Adams  and  Sumner, 
Labor  Problems,  p.  518. 

*  Ensor,  p.  189;  Hillquit,  op.  cit.,  p.  214,  seq.\  G.  B.  Shaw,  Fabian 
Essays,  p.  191. 


OF  THE   PRESENT   DAY  107 

share  of  the  national  wealth  showed  a  slight  decline 
from  4.21%  to  4.2%.^ 

While  a  different  conclusion  is  arrived  at  by  T.  S. 
Adams,  who  states  as  a  probability  "  that  the  distri- 
bution of  wealth  is  becoming  less  rather  than  more 
unequal,"  Professor  Adams's  figures  labor  under  the 
same  disadvantage  as  Mr.  Sanial's,  —  that  of  being 
based  upon  accumulations  of  wealth  rather  than  upon 
income.^  It  is  impossible  to  measure  the  share  of 
the  proletariat  in  this  way,  however,  since  the  prole- 
tarians by  definition  possess  no  accumulated  wealth 
of  sufficient  amount  to  afford  them  an  income.  Pro- 
fessor Adams's  statistics  as  to  the  equalization  of 
land  holdings  and  estates  admitted  to  probate  have 
little  bearing  upon  the  relative  position  of  the  work- 
ing class,  if  we  accept  as  even  approximately  correct 
the  computation  of  Chas.  B.  Spahr  that  of  12079 
men  over  25  years  old  who  died  in  New  York  in 
1893,  only  about  one  fourth  left  any  property  of 
sufficient  importance  to  pass  through  the  surrogate's 
office.^ 

Until  we  have  a  complete  series  of  statistics  as  to 
the  income,  rather  than  the  wealth,  of  the  three 
economic  classes,  we  cannot  settle  conclusively  the 
question  of  the  share  of  the  proletariat  relatively  to 
that  of  the  capitalists. 

The  condition  of  the  better  portion  of  wage- 
earners  as  compared  with  their  standard  of  living  is 
less  difficult  to  appraise,  as  local  statistics  are  here 
of  value. 

The  152  family  budgets  taken  by  Professor  Adams 

*  Socialist  Almanac,  p.  lOO,  104;   Socialist  Poster,  No.  I. 
'  Labor  Problems,  p.  535. 

*  Concentration  of  Wealth,  p.  56,  note. 


io8  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

as  representing  those  of  the  more  prosperous  working 
people  show  that,  although  real  wages  had  risen  con- 
siderably from  1875  to  1902,  the  average  yearly 
surplus  per  family  had  decreased  from  $24.72  to 
$16.18.  In  only  25  out  of  the  152  cases  was  the 
head  of  the  family  able  to  meet  expenses  unaided, 
and,  although  child  labor  had  practically  disappeared 
since  the  earlier  period,  more  than  one-third  of  the 
wives  were  now  engaged  in  gainful  occupations,  as 
against  one  thirty-third  in  1875.^  In  47  cases,  more- 
over, nearly  one  third  of  the  whole  number,  the  com- 
bined earnings  of  the  family  were  not  sufficient  to 
make  both  ends  meet  without  external  assistance. 
Still  confining  his  statements  to  the  better  class  of  male 
workers  in  city  manufactories.  Professor  Adams  con- 
cludes that  at  least  one-half  of  these  workers  earned 
in  1900  less  than  $480.  The  1905  Census  of  Manu- 
factures gives  the  wages  of  the  median  group  of  men 
wage-earners  for  the  country  and  also  for  New  York 
State  as  from  $10  to  $12,  the  yearly  income,  allowing 
nothing  for  idleness,  thus  amounting  to  from  $520  to 
$624.-  Viewing  these  figures  in  the  light  of  the  re- 
cent computation  of  the  living  standard  for  the  Man- 
hattan family  at  $825  a  year,  it  would  seem  that, 
after  allowing  io%>  for  increase  in  prices  and  differ- 
ences in  locality,  there  remains  a  deficiency  of  ap- 
proximately one  to  two  hundred  dollars.^ 

The  wage  schedule  of  the  Interborough  Rapid 
Transit  Company,  which  went  into  effect  February 
1st,  1 9 10,  in  avowed  recognition  of  the  higher  cost 
of  living,  may  throw  some  light  on  conditions  in  Nqw 

'  Labor  Problems,  p.  525,  quoted  from  Mass.  Bureau  of  Statistics  of 
Labor. 

2  Census  of  Manufactures,  1905,  Earnings  of  Wage-Earners,  p.  36. 
*  Chapin,  op.  cit.,  p.  245,  seq.,  281. 


OF  THE    PRESENT   DAY  109 

York  City,  This  schedule  includes  certain  of  the 
conductors,  and  all  of  the  trainmen,  gatemen,  ticket 
agents,  platform  men,  train  clerks,  and  hand  switch- 
men. It  shows  a  range  of  from  $1.80  to  $2.60  per 
day,  averaging  $2.24,  —  $13.54  for  a  week  of  6 
days  and  $704.08  for  a  full  year's  work,  allowing 
nothing  for  illness;  for  the  highest  grade  of  $2.60 
per  day  this  rises  to  $811.20,  still  something  under 
the  minimum  standard  of  living  for  Manhattan.^ 

As  to  the  lower  stratum  of  the  working-class,  men- 
tioned by  Hillquit  as  being  in  a  condition  of  absolute 
deterioration,  there  is  little  definite  Information, 
Hovering  as  It  does  always  about  the  minimum  of 
subsistence,  there  is  hardly  room  for  deterioration  in 
Its  condition,  and  any  such  change  for  the  worse  as 
Hillquit  speaks  of  can  be  taken  only  as  referring  to 
the  numbers  of  this  class  relatively  to  the  population. 
Such  figures  are  difficult  to  procure,  owing  to  the  lack 
of  interest  in  the  subject  until  recent  years. 

The  Socialist  authority  on  this  matter  In  America 
is  Robert  Hunter,  who  eight  years  ago  estimated  ten 
millions  of  the  American  people  to  be  In  a  condition 
of  poverty.  Interpreted  as  lack  of  the  necessities  for 
efficient  llfe.^  Although  this  calculation  has  been 
criticised  as  partisan  and  inaccurate,  nothing  more 
satisfactory  has  been  produced  In  this  country,  and 
It  agrees  fairly  well  with  the  English  figures  of  Booth 
and  Rowntree,  quoted  by  Professor  Adams.  While 
Hunter  estimates  that  ten  millions,  or  about  12^/2% 
of  the  comparatively  prosperous  American  people, 
are  in  poverty,  Booth  applies  this  designation  to  30% 
of  the  London,  population,  and  Rowntree's  figures  of 

1  N.  Y.  Call,  —  verified  and  corrected  at  Interborough  office. 
*  Poverty,  p.  60,  62. 


no  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

io%  for  York  are  amended  to  20%  by  Professor 
Adams.^ 

Statistics  as  to  pauperism  and  unemployment  may 
throw  some  light  upon  the  proportion  of  those  below 
the  poverty  line  to  the  whole  community.  The  fig- 
ures as  to  the  former  show  that  the  proportion  of 
almshouse  paupers  to  the  100,000  has  steadily  fallen 
from  132  in  1880  to  116.6  in  1890,  and  101.4  In 
1903,  but  these  need  to  be  materially  modified  in 
view  of  the  increasing  number  of  benevolent  instltu- 
tlons.2  In  1890  the  Inmates  of  these  numbered 
178.7  to  the  100,000,  and  the  number  of  such  per- 
sons nearly  doubled  between  that  year  and  1904.^ 

"  A  gradual  segregation  has  been  going  on,"  says 
the  Special  Report  on  Paupers  In  Almshouses,  "  and 
thousands  who  formerly  would  have  sought  the  alms- 
house as  the  only  refuge  are  being  distributed  among 
hospitals  for  the  sick  or  the  insane,  schools  for 
the  feeble-minded  or  the  deaf  and  blind,  children's 
homes,  colonies  for  epileptics,  and  a  multitude  of 
variously  named  benevolent  institutions.  .  .  .  More 
adequate  legislation  governing  almshouses  and  better 
methods  of  administration  have  also  contributed 
toward  a  diminution  of  the  almshouse  population. 
Finally,  recent  years  have  witnessed  an  extraordinary 
development  of  rationally  organized  charity  work. 
.  .  .  The  rise  or  fall  In  the  ratios  of  almshouse  pau- 
pers to  the  population  can  only  remotely  serve  as 
a  general  index  of  prevailing  distress  or  prosperity 
so  long  as  many  other  factors  entering  into  the 
problem  of  poverty  remain  unknown."  * 

'  Adams,  p.  143,  146,  147;   Booth,  op.  cit.,  Vol.  II.  p.  21,  1st  series. 

*  Special  Report,  Paupers  in  Almshouses,  1904,  p.  5. 

'  Census  Report  on  Benevolent  Institutions,  1904,  p.  lT-12. 

*  Special  Report,  p.  8,  1904,  Paupers  in  Almshouses;  see  also.Warner, 
op.  cit.,  p.  141-145- 


OF  THE    PRESENT   DAY  iii 

Professor  Adams  quotes  Mr.  Wood,  of  the  Royal 
Statistical  Society,  to  the  effect  that  unemployment 
in  Great  Britain  is  generally  on  the  increase.  He 
appends  a  table  of  ten-year  periods  which  bears  out 
his  statement  through  the  year  1889,  but  neglects 
to  carry  the  same  method  through  the  next  decade, 
when  the  result  would  have  shown  a  decrease  in 
unemployment.^  That  Mr.  Wood  may  be  correct  in 
his  general  conclusion,  however,  is  indicated  by  the 
recent  acute  condition  of  unemployment  in  England. 
According  to  the  Royal  Commission  on  the  Poor  Law 
and  Relief  of  Distress,  there  were  31  persons  out 
of  every  thousand  of  the  population  relieved  in 
1908-9  as  against  14  in  the  previous  year,  and  the 
number  of  men  applying  for  relief  had  risen  from 
1.9%  of  the  working  male  population  in  England 
and  Wales  in  1906-7  to  2.1%  the  next  year,  and 
4.1%  the  year  following.^ 

The  United  States  Census  made  no  successful  ef- 
fort to  obtain  statistics  of  unemployment  until  1890, 
but  the  percentage  of  15.1%  of  the  working  popu- 
lation at  that  time  unemployed  had  increased  to 
22.3%  in  1900,  10.8%  of  these,  or  2.4%  of  the 
whole,  being  without  employment  for  more  than  one 
half  the  year,^ 

While  statistics  such  as  the  foregoing  are  widely 
influential  among  American  Socialists,  it  must  be 
remembered  that  the  Marxian  doctrine  can  be  nei- 
ther proved  nor  disproved  by  dollars  and  cents,  as 
it  treats  of  increasing  misery,  not  of  increasing  pov- 
erty. The  fall  of  capitalism  is  to  be  due,  not  to 
starvation  of  the  masses,  but  to  "  accumulation  of 

1  Op.  cit.,  p.  521. 

2  Consular  and  Trade  Reports,  Oct.  21,  1909. 

'  Twelfth  Census,  Occupations,  p.  ccxxv,  ccxxxiv. 


112  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

misery,  agony  of  toll,  slavery,  ignorance,  brutality, 
mental  degradation."  ^  The  subject  is  psychological 
rather  than  economic. 

Accordingly,  the  interpretation  of  the  breakdown 
idea  by  American  Marxians  is  marked  throughout 
by  a  substitution  of  ideological  for  mechanical  forces. 
While  the  concentration  of  industry  is  counted  as 
technically  operative,  the  proletarization  of  the  mid- 
dle classes  and  the  misery  of  the  workers  are  con- 
sidered to  have  their  chief  effect  indirectly,  as  pro- 
moting the  revolutionary  Socialist  ideal. 

It  is  the  middle  class  who  both  transmit  the  con- 
ceptions of  the  ruling  class  to  the  proletariat  and 
give  form  to  those  very  conceptions  for  the  whole 
of  society  in  their  function  of  mental  workers.  In 
so  far  as  this  class  consists  on  the  one  hand  of  inde- 
pendent craftsmen  and  peasants  and  on  the  other 
of  intellectual  henchmen  of  the  capitalists,  the  bour- 
geois ideals  of  individualism  will  tend  to  dominate 
even  the  workers;  but  if  the  process  of  proletariza- 
tion gradually  transforms  these  molders  of  ideas 
into  insurgent  victims  of  capitalism  or  salaried  di- 
rectors of  socialized  industry,  the  revolutionary  and 
Socialist  ideals  thus  created  will  give  definite  direc- 
tion to  the  vague  discontent  of  the  masses  below 
them. 

To  the  Marxian,  therefore,  the  occasional  sur- 
vival of  the  petty  industry  is  immaterial,  provided 
only  that  the  ideal-creating  majority  of  the  middle 
class  be  transformed  into  the  intellectual  proletariat, . 
capable  of  inspiring  the  revolution  and  organizing 
the  industries  of  the  Socialist  commonwealth. 

The  increasing  exploitation  of  the  proletariat,  fur- 

»  Capital,  Vol.  I.  p.  66i. 


OF  THE   PRESENT   DAY  113 

thermore,  is  to  produce  the  catastrophe,  not  as  it 
drives  the  worker  to  starvation,  but  as  it  drives  him 
to  revolution.  "  Marx  fully  realized,"  writes  Pro- 
fessor Simkhovitch,  "that  poverty  as  such  creates 
no  revolutionary  class."  ^  The  American  Socialist, 
therefore,  whether  constructive  or  revolutionary, 
fights  unreservedly  on  the  side  of  organized  labor, 
without  apprehension  that  improved  conditions  for 
the  proletariat  may  defer  the  day  of  revolution. 
Karl  Marx  was  an  active  worker  for  labor  union- 
ism, which  he  termed 

"  a  regular  cooperation  between  employed  and  un- 
employed in  order  to  destroy  or  to  weaken  the  ruin- 
ous effects  of  this  natural  law  of  capitalistic  pro- 
duction on  their  class."  ^ 

Since,  according  to  the  Marxian  philosophy,  the 
development  of  capitalism  must  inevitably  increase 
the  ratio  of  exploitation,  widen  the  social  gulf,  and 
rivet  more  firmly  the  chains  that  bind  labor  to  capi- 
tal, every  absolute  advantage  in  labor  conditions 
must  serve  only  to  strengthen  the  proletariat  physi- 
cally and  mentally,  and  feed  their  growing  desires 
until  discontent  becomes  greater  and  greater. 

Discontent,  however,  is  not  enough.  The  fate 
of  capitalism  must  depend  ultimately  upon  the  de- 
cision of  the  worker  for  or  against  the  competitive 
system, — whether  he  will  choose  the  possibility  of 
Socialist  comfort  together  with  his  class,  or  the 
chance,  small,  but  often  precious,  of  himself  rising 
into  the  capitalist  class  above  the  heads  of  his  fel- 
lows.   While  Le  Rossignol  is  doubtless  superficial  in 

*  Op.  cit.,  No.  4,  p.  679. 
,  2  Capital,  Vol.  I.  p.  655,  quoted  Ibid.,  p.  251,  No.  3. 


114  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

his  confidence  that  the  workingman  may  be  counted 
on  for  conservatism,  it  is  true  that  individual  discon- 
tent is  as  likely  to  lead  the  worker  toward  conserva- 
tism as  toward  revolution,  if  it  does  not  take  the 
psychological  manifestation  already  designated  as 
"  class-consciousness." 

The  developing  organization  of  labor,  as  it  keeps 
pace  with  that  of  capitalism,  is  teaching  the  working- 
man  this  consciousness  of  the  identity  of  his  own  in- 
terest with  that  of  his  economic  class,  at  the  same 
time  that  it  gives  him  the  articulated  power  without 
which  discontent,  individual  or  class-conscious,  can 
never  become  a  revolutionary  force. 

So  far  in  their  interpretation  of  the  fall  of  capital- 
ism American  Marxians  are  united.  The  revolution 
is  inevitable,  as  a  result  of  the  technical  forces  of 
concentration  of  capital  and  massing  of  labor,  and 
the  ideological  forces  arising  from  the  proletarization 
of  the  middle  classes  and  the  increasing  exploitation 
of  the  workers.  The  date  of  the  change  is  wholly 
uncertain,  but  before  that  time  there  will  doubtless 
be  a  gradual  improvement  in  the  absolute  condition 
of  at  least  a  portion  of  the  working  class. 

At  this  point,  however,  the  revolutionist  and  the 
constructivist,  in  their  varying  degrees,  diverge  from 
one  another.  To  the  extreme  revolutionist  there  will 
be  no  steps  toward  Socialism:  the  intervening  period 
will  be  attended  with  such  a  socializing  process  as 
to  bring  the  great  industries  under  the  control  of  the 
state,  but  this  movement  will  be  automatic  and  capi- 
talist rather  than  conscious  and  Socialist.  When 
industry  thus  becomes  technically  ripe,  and  at  the 
same  time  the  proletariat,  organized  by  the  indus- 
trial unions  and  armed  with  full  political  rights,  has 


OF  THE    PRESENT   DAY  115 

reached  the  point  of  revolution,  the  cataclysm  will 
be  here,  and,  while  violence  is  not  an  essential  ac- 
companiment, it  is  probable  that  capitalism  will  not 
submit  without  a  struggle. 

The  constructivist,  on  the  other  hand,  looks  less 
for  sudden  cataclysm  than  for  gradual  reconstruction, 
as  the  growing  realization  of  evil  on  the  part  of  the 
politically  powerful  workers  tends  to  bring  about 
modifications  in  the  present  system.  He  looks  for 
revolution  rather  than  reform,  in  that  the  entire  basis 
of  society  is  to  be  changed,  but  the  transformation 
will  resemble  the  gradual  industrial  revolution  rather 
than  the  violent  political  upheaval.  The  socializing 
process  in  industry  is  to  be  consciously  utilized  by 
the  ballots  of  the  workingmen,  in  such  a  way  that 
hand  in  hand  with  the  gradual  expropriation  of  capi- 
tal will  come  the  control  of  production  by  legislative 
acts. 

Although  the  writings  of  Marx  are  not  free  from 
prophecies  of  a  violent  cataclysm,  and  while  at  first 
he  looked  to  the  proletarian  revolution  as  the  only 
solution  of  the  ten-hour  problem,^  he  soon  became  an 
active  worker  for  the  Factory  Acts.  In  his  inaugural 
address  before  the  International  in  1864  he  ex- 
presses his  unrestrained  rejoicing  over  the  ten-hour 
law  in  such  a  way  as  to  imply  the  gradual  revo- 
lution just  described:  — 

"  The  struggle  for  the  legal  limitation  of  the 
working  day  was  the  more  bitter,  because  it  was  not 
merely  a  check  upon  individual  greed,  but  also  a 
direct  intervention  in  the  great  battle  waged  betv/een 
the  blind  law  of  supply  and  demand  —  the  political 
economy  of  the  bourgeoisie  —  and  the  principle  of 

*  Simkhovitch,  op.  cit.,  No.  3,  p.  243. 


ii6  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

social  regulation  of  production,  which  is  the  quin- 
tessence of  the  political  economy  of  the  laboring 
class.  And  therefore  the  ten-hour  bill  was  not  only 
a  great  practical  success,  it  was  the  victory  of  a 
principle."  ^ 

The  inevitability  of  the  constructivist  is  thus 
strongly  modified  by  the  idea  of  conscious  political 
action.    J.  M.  Work  puts  it  in  this  way:  — 

"  Practically  every  move  made  by  the  capitalist 
class  "  convinces  "  the  workingmen  that  the  Socialist 
ballot  is  their  only  hope."  ^  \ 

Since,  moreover,  the  united  proletariat  at  no  time 
confronts  a  united  capitalism,  violence  is  not  a  prob- 
able accompaniment  of  the  revolution. 

"  More  likely,"  according  to  Hillquit,  "  the  pro- 
cess of  transformation  will  be  complicated  and  di- 
versified, and  will  be  marked  by  a  series  of  economic 
and  social  reforms  and  legislative  measures  tending 
to  divest  the  ruling  classes  of  their  m.onopolies,  privi- 
leges, and  advantages,  step  by  step,  until  they  are 
practically  shorn  of  their  power  to  exploit  their  fel- 
low-men; i.  e.,  until  all  the  Important  means  of  pro- 
duction have  passed  into  collective  ownership  and  all 
the  principal  industries  are  reorganized  on  the  basis 
of  Socialist  cooperation."  ^ 

While  American  Socialists,  then,  are  unanimous 
in  the  belief  that  our  social  order  is  destined  to  in-- 
evitable  decay  and  that  a  Socialist  revolution  is  being 
prepared,  technically  by  the  process  of  concentra- 

*  Inaugural  Address,  quoted  by  Simkhovitch,  op.  cit.,  No.  3,  p.  253. 
'  Work,  op.  cit.,  p.  151. 

•  Hillquit,  Socialism  in  Theory  and  Practice,  p.  loi. 


OF   THE    PRESENT   DAY  117 

tlon,  ideologically  in  the  proletanzation  of  the  middle 
classes  and  the  increasing  exploitation  of  the  workers, 
there  is  a  difference  of  opinion  between  the  right  and 
left  of  the  Socialist  Party  as  to  the  character  of  this 
revolution.  While  the  cataclysm  of  the  one  school 
is  to  follow  a  period  of  automatic  socialization  and 
be  characterized  by  a  decisive  conflict,  probably  sud- 
den and  possibly  violent,  between  the  capitalist  and 
proletarian  classes,  the  other  looks  forward  to  a 
long  series  of  contests  ranged  about  the  conscious 
steps  toward  socialization,  conceivably  culminating 
in  a  final  open  struggle  between  the  two  classes, 
but  more  probably  shading  into  the  Socialist  common- 
wealth through  transitional  stages,  no  one  of  which 
requires  a  cataclysm  for  its  inauguration. 


CHAPTER    IX 

THE    ULTIMATE   ECONOMIC    PROGRAM   OF   SOCIALISM 
PART    I.     THE   DETAILS   OF   EXPROPRIATION 

If  we  compare  on  the  one  hand  the  Communist 
Manifesto  and  the  SociaHst  Party  program  of  1908 
and  on  the  other  the  American  socialist  writings  of 
the  last  generation,  such  as  Gronlund's  Cooperative 
Commonwealth  and  Vail's  Modern  Socialism,  we 
notice  a  striking  difference  of  subject-matter.^  While 
the  latter  expositions  of  Socialism  consist  almost 
wholly  of  arraignments  of  the  present  system  and 
detailed  plans  for  the  ultimate  Socialist  state,  both 
the  Manifesto  and  the  modern  program,  although 
emphasizing  with  equal  vigor  the  defects  of  capital- 
ism, yet  make  hardly  an  explicit  reference  to  the 
coming  commonwealth,  and  devote  their  main  ener- 
gies to  three  things,  an  historical  analysis  of  capital- 
ism, a  call  to  the  class  struggle,  and  a  list  of  imme- 
diate demands.  Even  less  detailed  than  in  the  Mani- 
festo is  the  allusion  of  the  Socialist  platform  to  the 
coming  state: 

"  The  wage-workers  cannot  be  freed  from  ex- 
ploitation without  conquering  the  political  power 
and  substituting  collective  for  private  ownership  of 
the  land  and  means  of  production  used  for  ex- 
ploitation "; 

*  Vail,  op.  cit.,  p.  45,  seq.;  Gronlund,  op.  c'lt.,  p.  iii,  seq. 


AMERICAN    SOCIALISM  119 

while  the  Municipal  Program  of  New  York  gives 
only  a  single  phrase  to  "  the  ultimate  object  of  over- 
throwing capitalism  and  establishing  the  cooperative 
commonwealth."  ^ 

The  platform  of  the  Socialist  Labor  Party  calls 
the  workers  to  put  an  end  to  the  class  conflict 

"  by  placing  the  land  and  all  means  of  production, 
transportation,  and  distribution  into  the  hands  of 
the  people  as  a  collective  body,  and  substituting  the 
Cooperative  Commonwealth  for  the  present  state 
of  planless  production,  Industrial  war,  social  disorder 
— a  commonwealth  in  which  every  worker  shall  have 
the  free  exercise  and  full  benefit  of  his  faculties, 
multiplied  by  all  the  modern  factors  of  civilization."  ^ 

In  the  authoritative  Socialist  writings  of  the  day 
we  find  an  absence  of  emphasis  upon  the  ultimate 
commonwealth  hardly  less  surprising  to  the  reader 
whose  previous  information  in  Socialism  has  been 
procured  from  Looking  Backward  or  News  from 
Nowhere.^  Spargo's  Socialism  takes  up  "  The  Out- 
lines of  the  Socialist  State  "  for  the  last  thirty  pages 
only,  after  two  hundred  pages  of  history  and  analy- 
sis; Hillquit  gives  the  subject  only  forty  pages  in- 
serted between  one  hundred  of  philosophy  and  two 
hundred  of  tactics  and  reforms;  Simons  makes  his 
socialism  Incidental  to  essays  In  economic  history; 
and  Hunter  and  Thompson  leave  the  ultimate  pro- 
gram almost  entirely  to  the  Imagination  in  their  en- 
thusiasm for  practical  political  action.* 

^  National  Platform,  p.  4. 

2  P.  26. 

3  Looking  Backward,  p.  65,  seq.'.  News,  etc.,  p.  113,  seq. 

*  Spargo,  op.  cit.;  Hillquit,  Socialism  in  Theory  and  Practice;  Simons, 
American  Farmer,  Class  Struggles  in  America;  Hunter,  Socialists  at  Work, 
Thompson,  op.  cit. 


I20  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

In  this  proportionate  treatment  the  American  So- 
cialists are  consistent  with  the  principles  of  Marxism. 
The  distinction  between  Utopian  and  scientific  So- 
cialism lies  in  the  fact  that  the  former  submitted  to 
the  choice  of  mankind  a  plan  founded  upon  ethics 
and  expediency,  while  the  latter  present  an  analysis 
of  economic  forces,  with  a  prognostication  as  to 
their  more  or  less  inevitable  tendencies.  The  strictly 
economic  interpretation  of  history  precludes  the  de- 
termination of  the  details  of  a  society  until  the  ma- 
terial conditions  which  are  to  produce  that  society 
have  arrived;  the  new  institution  must  develop  within 
the  shell  of  the  old.^  The  general  prophecy  of  the 
socialization  of  capital  by  a  victorious  proletariat  is 
deduced  from  the  essential  conditions  of  economic 
development,  but  the  details  of  the  consequent  social 
order  must  depend  largely  upon  the  specific  industrial 
relationships  prevailing  at  the  time  of  the  revolu- 
tion. Spargo  speaks  for  the  American  Socialists  in 
declaring  that  it  would  be  absurd  and  contrary  to 
Marxian  principles  to  attempt  to  give  detailed  speci- 
fications of  the  coming  state.^ 

While  the  immediate  demand  is  a  part  of  scientific 
Socialism  in  so  far  as  it  is  an  outgrowth  of  the  eco- 
nomic forces  of  any  given  time,  the  ultimate  demand 
is  Utopian  unless  it  is  a  direct  consequence  of  inev- 
itable economic  development.  Hence  the  ultimate 
program  of  scientific  Socialism,  from  the  Communist 
Manifesto  to  the  present  day,  has  contained  only 
the  general  demand  for 

"  the  transfer  of  ownership  In  the  social  tools  of 
production  —  the   land,    factories,    machinery,    rail- 

*  Marx,  Critique  of  Political  Economy,  p.  12-13. 
'  Spargo,  Socialism,  p.  211. 


OF  THE    PRESENT   DAY  121 

roads,  mines,  etc.  —  from  the  individual  capitalists 
to  the  people,  to  be  operated  for  the  benefit  of  all."  ^ 

In  so  far  as  Socialism  has  been  dominated  by  the 
idea  of  automatic  cataclysm,  the  political  movement 
has  felt  the  need  of  no  further  specifications.  The 
revolution  would  inevitably  arrive,  and  the  trium- 
phant working  class  would  be  guided  in  constructive 
details  by  contemporary  economic  conditions.  As 
before  noted,  however,  the  element  of  conscious 
choice  has,  beginning  with  Marx  himself,  gradually 
come  to  modify  the  expectation  of  cataclysm.^  While 
Socialism  as  a  science  could  rest  content  with  the 
broad  prophecy  of  a  social  democracy.  Socialism  as 
a  political  movement  has  been  compelled  to  win  sup- 
port by  addressing  men's  desires. 

The  essence  of  Socialist  propaganda,  therefore, 
is  appeal  not  to  the  scientific  spirit,  but  to  the  prin- 
ciple of  class  or  human  interest.  Irrespective  of  the 
inevitability  of  the  Socialist  commonwealth,  will  such 
a  society  be  practicable  and  desirable?  Around  this 
question  cluster  all  the  popular  attacks  upon  Social- 
ism. Where  scientific  Socialists  have  refused  to  fill 
in  the  Marxian  outline  of  their  democracy,  this  task 
has  been  performed  on  the  one  hand  by  such  popu- 
lar opponents  as  Rae,  Mallock,  and  Cathrein,  and 
on  the  other  by  the  Utopians  and  State  Socialists.^ 
Accordingly,  although  Marx  considered  the  details 
of  the  ultimate  program  a  mere  matter  for  specula- 
tion, and  Liebknecht  gave  everyone  leave  to  conceive 
the  Socialist  state  as  he  pleased,  the  present-day  So- 

^  Hillquit,  Theory  and  Practice,  p.  ii;  see  also  Simons,  Class  Strug- 
gles, p.  31,  and  Debs,  Socialist  Campaign  Book,  1908,  p.  5. 

*  Critique  of  Political  Economy,  p.  12. 

^  Cathrein,  op.  cit.  p.  260;  Mallock,  op.  cit.,  p.  60,  seq.;  Menger, 
L'Etat  Socialiste,  Bk.  I.,  Chap.  11,  Bk.  II,  Chap.  7. 


122  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

cialists  are  realizing  the  need  of  some  authorized 
ideal  of  the  coming  commonwealth  to  oppose  to  the 
unauthorized  creations  of  their  opponents. 

These  attempts  at  detailed  description  have  found 
their  way  into  the  Socialist  programs  only,  as  a  rule, 
negatively,  in  such  cases  as  the  repudiation  of  Inter- 
ference with  religion,  but  they  form  an  important 
part  of  propaganda,  and  as  such  are  worthy  of  no- 
tice. They  are  scientific  In  so  far  as  they  are  neces- 
sary deductions  from  essential  economic  tendencies 
and  from  the  general  definition  of  Socialism,  Utopian 
In  so  far  as  they  represent  mere  suggestions  based 
upon  utility  or  upon  transitory  economic  forces. 

Taking  as  a  working  definition  of  Socialism  the 
prevention  of  exploitation  by  means  of  the  demo- 
cratic socialization  of  capital,  we  are  confronted  first 
by  questions  as  to  the  extent  and  the  process  of  so- 
cialization. 

As  to  the  first  point,  many  writers  have  drawn 
false  Implications  by  using  the  accepted  definition  of 
capital  as  all  wealth  used  In  the  production  of  other 
wealth,  and  thus  crediting  Socialism  with  the  purpose 
of  expropriating  such  Individual  tools  as  the  needle 
and  the  wheelbarrow.  The  Socialist  definition  of 
capital,  however,  as  wealth  used  In  exploitation,  re- 
stricts to  an  indefinite  extent  the  objects  of  socializa- 
tion, or  expropriation.^  The  definition  of  Hillquit 
previously  quoted,  therefore,  restricts  expropriation 
to  the  social  tools  of  production,  specifying  these  to 
avoid  misunderstanding. 

For  a  time  Socialism  felt  so  strongly  the  impetus 
of  the  Marxian  theories  that  It  confidently  expected 
the  concentration  predicted  by  him  to  go  on  until 

*  Untermann,  Marxian  Economics,  p.  28. 


OF   THE    PRESENT   DAY  123 

every  workshop  and  truck-farm  should  become  a 
means  of  exploitation  and  thus  an  appropriate  object 
for  socialization.  Cathrein  therefore  argues  against 
Socialism  as  complete  collectivization,  and  Hirsch 
quotes  the  Fabians  as  eventually  aiming  at  all 
capital.^ 

As  has  already  been  noticed,  however,  concen- 
tration has  been  checked  in  several  quarters,  the  most 
notable  being  that  of  agriculture.  The  Socialists  have 
been  compelled  to  reckon  with  both  the  independent 
American  farmer  and  the  European  peasant  proprie- 
tor as  persistent  though  constantly  modified  factors; 
and  A.  M.  Simons,  after  a  detailed  study  of  the  mat- 
ter in  The  American  Farmer,  comes  to  the  conclusion 
that  the  medium-sized  farm  is  increasing  in  the 
United  States  at  the  expense  of  those  abnormally 
large  or  small.- 

The  American  Socialist  leaders,  accordingly,  have 
for  several  years  followed  Kautsky  in  assuring  the 
small  farmer  that  he  is  not  to  be  molested  in  the 
independent  working  and  even  ownership  of  his 
land,^  Simons  has  told  the  farmer  in  great  detail 
that  he  is  as  much  a  member  of  the  exploited  class 
as  is  the  industrial  laborer,  and  that  his  interests  lie 
wholly  with  those  of  the  city  proletariat  in  getting 
rid  of  the  incubus  of  capitalist  control.^  In  Thomp- 
son's Constructive  Program  of  Socialism  we  have  an 
outline  of  the  changes  in  German  policy  regarding 
the  agricultural  problem  and  the  consequent  effect 
on  American  thought.*^ 

^  Hirsch,  p.  18;   Cathrein,  p.  245,  seq.  *  P.  lOl,  seq. 

'  Kautsky,  Social  Revolution,  p.  159,  Kerr  edition. 
*  Simons,  The  American  Farmer,  p.  137,  Socialism  and  the  Farmers, 
p.  63,  seq. 

6  Op.  cit.,  p.  63-66. 


124  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

Notwithstanding  the  foregoing  attitude  among  the 
leaders,  the  1908  program  of  the  Socialist  Party- 
included  no  specific  agricultural  reforms,  devoting 
only  a  phrase  to  the  present  exploited  condition  of 
the  small  farmer,  and  embraced  in  its  immediate 
demands  the  collective  ownership  of  all  land.  Within 
a  year,  however,  an  amendment  to  the  platform  was 
passed  by  national  referendum  which  marks  a  turn- 
ing-point in  American  Socialism.  By  this  amend- 
ment the  words,  "  and  all  land,"  were  struck,  out 
from  the  demands  and  the  following  inserted  in  the 
sections  on  General  Principles :  —  \ 

"  There  can  be  no  absolute  private  title  to  land. 
All  private  titles,  whether  called  fee  simple  or  other- 
wise^ are  and  must  be  subordinate  to  the  public  title. 
The  Socialist  Party  strives  to  prevent  land  from  being 
used  for  the  purpose  of  exploitation  and  speculation. 
It  demands  the  collective  possession,  control,  or  man- 
agement of  land  to  whatever  extent  may  be  necessary 
to  attain  that  end.  It  is  not  opposed  to  the  occupa- 
tion and  possession  of  land  by  those  using  it  in  a  use- 
ful and  bona  fide  manner  without  exploitation."  ^ 

Needless  to  say,  the  passing  of  this  declaration 
has  aroused  great  antagonism  among  those  party 
members  who  cling  to  the  Interpretation  of  the  class 
struggle  as  excluding  the  independent  worker,  and  to 
the  expectation  of  automatic  concentration  in  all 
industry.  The  rival  Socialist  Labor  Party,  which 
still  demands  In  its  platform  the  public  ownership  of 
the  land  and  all  means  of  production,  hailed  with 
joy  this  proof  of  the  "  middle-class  "  character  of 
the  Socialist  Party,  and  gave  great  publicity  to  the 

*  Referendum  B.,  1909  (italics  mine). 


OF  THE    PRESENT   DAY  125 

secession  of  a  ward  branch  in  Denver  on  the  ground 
of  the  party  decision  "  to  drop  Socialism  from  its 
platform  and  adopt  in  its  stead  an  emasculated  form 
of  the  late  lamented  Single  Tax."  ^ 

As  has  previously  been  brought  out,  agriculture 
is  not  the  only  field  in  which  the  Socialist  expects  the 
continuance  of  some  private  production.  Marxians 
are  agreed  upon  the  needlessness  of  interference 
with  the  non-exploiting  mechanic  or  tradesman,  and 
the  only  dispute  in  the  matter  between  the  orthodox 
and  the  Revisionist  is  as  to  the  prospect  of  the  auto- 
matic disappearance  of  these  small  industries  under 
the  pressure  of  centralized  competition,  be  the  latter 
capitalist  or  socialist  in  nature.  The  divergence  of 
present-day  Socialism  on  this  point  from  the  complete 
collectivization  of  Bellamy  Is  Indicated  by  the  fact 
that  a  party  speaker  stated  recently  to  a  large  gath- 
ering of  the  rank  and  file  his  belief  that  In  the  coming 
commonwealth  only  50  or  60%  of  the  means  of 
production  would  be  socialized. 

J.  M.  Work  expresses  very  simply  the  prevailing 
attitude  regarding  the  extent  of  expropriation :  — 

"  I  do  not  mean  that  Socialism  will  forbid  any 
man  owning  and  running  any  industry  he  pleases. 
Socialism  will  own  and  run  Industries  itself.  It  will 
give  the  workers  the  full  value  of  their  product. 
It  will  sell  the  products  at  cost.  Anyone  else  engag- 
ing In  the  same  Industries  would,  therefore,  have  to 
give  the  workers  the  full  value  of  their  product  and 
sell  the  products  at  cost.  But  he  could  n't  make 
anything  that  way.  Consequently  he  would  n't  do 
it.    If  the  Industry  were  of  such  a  character  that  he 

*  S.  L.  P.  platform,  p.  26;  The  Daily  People,  Oct.  12,  1909. 


126  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

could  carry  it  on  by  his  own  labor  alone  he  might  do 
so.    But  he  would  not  be  exploiting  anyone  then."  ^ 

The  process  of  expropriation  is  a  matter  upon 
which  Socialists  refrain  from  making  definite  state- 
ments, on  the  ground  that  it  must  depend  upon  the 
conditions  of  the  social  revolution  in  each  country. 
If  the  proletariat  should  come  into  power  as  the 
result  of  a  civil  war,  confiscation  without  compensa- 
tion would  be  probable,  and  Socialists  cite  as  a  prece- 
dent the  emancipation  of  the  slaves  by  Abraham 
Lincoln.^  As  a  violent  revolution  is  not  generally 
anticipated,  however,  the  majority  of  Socialists,  in- 
cluding Marx,  have  expected  that  some  measure 
of  compensation  will  be  adopted  as  expedient  for 
society. 

"  It  is  not  less  nor  more  than  the  truth,"  says 
Spargo,  "  that  all  the  leading  Socialists  of  the  world 
agree  that  compensation  could  be  paid  without  doing 
violence  to  a  single  Socialist  principle,  and  most  of 
them  favor  it."  ^ 

As  to  the  form  of  compensation,  the  most  radical 
schemes  are  adapted  only  to  the  period  of  complete 
Socialist  triumph,  and  as  such  are  confessedly  ten- 
tative. Gronlund  proposed  that  the  capitalists  be 
compensated  merely  with  annuities  terminable  with 
their  lives  or  those  of  their  children,  these  annuities 
to  allow  a  standard  of  living  not  far  from  that  for- 
merly enjoyed.*  Another  suggestion,  and  one  more 
suited  to  a  time  of  transition,  is  the  payment  to  the 
capitalist  of  bonds  bearing  a  decreasing  rate  of  inter- 

*  Work,  op.  cit.,  p.  50.  *  Ibid.,  p.  82-84. 

*  Socialism,  Rev.,  p.  334;  see  also  Hillquit,  Socialism  in  Theory  and 
Practice,  p.  103. 

*  Gronlund,  Cooperative  Commonwealth,  p.  149. 


OF   THE   PRESENT    DAY  127 

est,  with  either  a  final  repudiation  of  the  principal 
or  a  payment  of  that  also  in  instalments. 

Certain  plans,  on  the  other  hand,  are  proposed 
as  immediate  measures  based  upon  present  economic 
conditions.  These  comprise  several  modes  of  proced- 
ure :  —  first,  to  secure  funds  for  government  industry, 
incidentally  decreasing  the  power  of  capital  in  pri- 
vate hands,  by  the  enforcement  of  the  present  taxes 
against  corporations  and  by  the  progressive  taxation 
of  incomes  and  inheritances;  second,  to  regulate  the 
granting  of  franchises  so  as  to  secure  reversal  to 
the  state  or  municipality  after  a  short  period;  and 
third,  by  means  of  the  funds  of  taxation,  supple- 
mented by  the  issue  of  ordinary  interest-bearing 
bonds,  to  organize  new  government  industries  and 
buy  up  such  private  concerns  as  the  people  deem  ex- 
pedient, beginning  with  the  natural  monopolies.^ 
These  suggestions  have  been  almost  wholly  Incor- 
porated in  the  demands  of  the  national  and  local 
platforms,  as  will  be  noted  later. 

The  expectation  is  that  the  private  energy  set 
free  in  this  manner  will  speedily  be  devoted  to  the 
formation  of  new  trusts.  As  fast  as  these  are  ripe 
for  socialization  the  government  will  in  turn  buy 
these  up,  and  as,  according  to  the  Socialist  creed, 
the  individual  industry  can  rarely  compete  with  the 
socialized,  the  rate  of  profit  will  steadily  fall  as  the 
rate  of  wages  increases  until  the  few  remaining  capi- 
talists gladly  relinquish  their  precarious  industries 
at  a  low  valuation  and  the  cooperative  common- 
wealth is  supreme.^ 

To  sum  up  the  chapter :  present-day  American  So- 

^  Thompson,  op.  cit.,  p.  28,  seq. 
•  A.  Besant,  Fabian  Essays,  p.  158. 


;i28  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

cialists  follow  the  principles  of  Marxism  in  refrain- 
ing in  their  official  utterances  from  details  as  to 
their  ultimate  program.  It  is  generally  agreed,  how- 
ever, that  the  extent  of  socialization  will  be  deter- 
mined by  the  extent  of  capital  in  the  Socialist  sense, 
and  that  the  process  must  depend  upon  the  economic 
conditions  prevailing  at  the  time;  while  certain  ten- 
tative plans  of  compensation  are  put  forth  in  propa- 
ganda with  a  view  to  the  ultimate  Socialist  state, 
other  measures  are  proposed  for  immediate  adop- 
tion under  present  conditions. 


CHAPTER   X 

THE    ULTIMATE    ECONOMIC    PROGRAM 
PART  II.   PRODUCTION   AND  DISTRIBUTION 

The  essence  of  Marxism  is  the  inevitable  sociali- 
zation of  production  and  distribution  developing 
from  the  capitalist  system  of  industry;  yet  the  form 
which  this  socialization  is  to  take  is  a  mooted  ques- 
tion. The  communist  organization,  usually  taken 
for  granted  by  the  pre-Marxians,  is  by  modern  So- 
cialists relegated  to  Utopia  as  a  possible  develop- 
ment in  the  distant  future  from  a  long-established 
Socialist  state.  The  bureaucracy  of  the  State  So- 
cialists, on  the  other  hand,  while  acknowledged  by 
certain  Marxists  as  a  possible  intermediate  condition 
between  individualist  capitalism  and  Socialism,  is  in- 
compatible with  the  democratic  management  which 
is  an  essential  of  the  Socialist  society. 

There  are  three  present  forms  of  industrial  or- 
ganization which  Socialists  believe  may  contain  the 
germs  of  the  future  socialized  production.  These 
are  the  voluntary  cooperative,  the  labor  union,  and 
the  state-owned  industry  developed  from  the  "  tru&t." 

Socialists  consider  the  voluntary  cooperative  an 
integral  part  of  the  working-class  movement.  They 
believe  the  principles  under  which  it  operates  to  be 
harmonious  with  those  of  industrial  development, 


I30  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

and  expect  this  form  of  organization  to  be  prominent 
in  the  future  "  cooperative  commonwealth."  It  is 
generally  acknowledged,  however,  that  the  coopera- 
tive has  not  yet  been  tried  on  a  sufficient  scale  to 
serve  as  a  type  of  Socialist  production.  The  Bel- 
gian cooperative  societies  and  the  successors  of  the 
Rochdale  Pioneers,  to  be  sure,  have  achieved  success 
as  distributive  organizations;  even  in  the  field  of 
production  the  Brussels  bakeries  control  io%  of  the 
trade  and  the  English  Wholesale  Cooperative  can 
point  to  twenty-two  kinds  of  goods  manufactured  with 
a  yearly  profit  of  over  ninety-eight  thousand  pounds.^ 
In  spite  of  these  facts,  however,  the  fair-minded  So- 
cialist acknowledges  that,  while  distributive  coopera- 
tion is  a  success,  productive  cooperation  has  not  won 
for  itself  a  permanent  place  in  industry.  The  Eng- 
lish societies,  successful  as  they  may  be,  are  not  pure 
cooperatives  in  that  they  are  undemocratic  in  system, 
and  work  for  profits  rather  than  mutual  benefit;  the 
Belgian  bakeries  constitute  a  special  case,  in  that  the 
baker's  trade  is  one  of  the  few  in  which  production 
and  distribution  are  regularly  associated,  and  that 
the  enterprise  is  supported  by  the  great  distributive 
society  of  the  cooperatives.-  Productive  cooperation 
is  an  exception  in  our  present  social  order. 

"  As  a  rule,"  says  Hillquit,  "  productive  societies 
attain  a  measure  of  business  success  only  when  con- 
ducted in  conjunction  with  societies  for  consumption. 
As  independent  enterprises  they  fail."  ^ 

Those  American  Socialists  who  are  influenced  most 
strongly  by  the  ideas  of  Syndicalism  believe  that 

*  Bliss,  Encyclopedia  of  Social  Reform,  p.  295-297. 

*  Cooperation,  p.  4. 

*  Socialism  in  Theory  and  Practice,  p.  252. 


OF   THE   PRESENT    DAY  131 

the  industrial  union  is  the  germ  from  which  shall 
grow  the  Socialist  system  of  production.  They  claim 
that,  containing  as  it  does  the  skilled  and  unskilled 
workers  of  an  entire  industry,  it  is  sufficient  for  every 
constructive  purpose,  and  that  the  manual  and  mental 
workers  so  organized  will  be  competent  to  meet  the 
whole  economic  situation,  unaided  by  the  political 
state.  To  Sombart's  criticism  that  a  social  organiza- 
tion growing  out  of  the  labor  union  could  be  based 
only  upon  the  primitive  tool  system  of  production, 
the  Industrial  union  replies  that  the  industrial  dif- 
fers from  the  craft  union  in  the  very  fact  that  it  Is 
the  outgrowth  not  of  the  tool  system,  but  of  the 
capitalist  machine  industry,  and  thus  marks  the  next 
form  of  organized  production.^ 

Except  for  the  extreme  advocates  of  industrial 
unionism,  however.  Socialists  look  forward  to  a  sys- 
tem of  production  and  distribution  based  for  the  most 
part  upon  government  ownership,  Its  form  to  be  a 
development  from  the  "  trust "  of  to-day,  which, 
according  to  Marxian  principles,  will  become  the 
typical  industrial  organization  during  the  last  stages 
of  capitalism.  Yet  none  of  the  experiments  hitherto 
made  In  this  direction  are  counted  by  Marxians  as 
true  specimens  of  Socialist  production.  The  United 
States  Post  Office  is  obliged  to  depend  upon  pri- 
vately owned  railroads,  while  the  state-owned  rail- 
roads of  Germany  owe  their  support  to  a  bureau- 
cratic militarism  directly  opposed  to  the  Socialist 
ideal. 

The  essence  of  Socialism  consists  in  the  ownership 
and  management  of  the  industrial  organization  by 
the  proletarian  society,  with  a  view  to  the  prevention 

*  See  Sombart,  op.  cit.,  Revised,  p.  lOO,  seq. 


132  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

of  exploitation.  Only  such  a  democratic  industrial 
organization,  as  yet  non-existent,  could  ever  be  taken 
as  a  type  of  Socialist  production,  and  only  when  this 
form  of  industry  should  become  the  dominant  na- 
tional type  could  the  features  most  characteristic  of 
Socialism  be  expected  to  develop.  For  the  details 
of  production  and  distribution  under  the  future  com- 
monwealth, therefore,  Socialist  thinkers  must  resort 
chiefly  to  speculation  or  to  deduction  from  the  rough 
outline  of  Marx  and  Engels  given  in  a  previous 
chapter. 

The  Americans  Hillquit  and  Simons  join  with 
Kautsky  and  Vandervelde  in  repudiating  centraliza- 
tion as  incompatible  with  democratic  control,  and  in 
vigorously  maintaining  the  principle  of  local  auton- 
omy, always  with  the  reservation  that  organization 
must  follow  in  the  steps  of  automatic  centralization.^ 
Simons  writes :  — 

"  The  size  of  the  group  owning  each  industry 
would  depend  upon  the  scale  of  production  which  was 
found  to  be  economical.  Probably  such  industries  as 
city  lighting,  street-cars,  waterworks,  etc.,  would  be 
owned  in  groups  roughly  approximating  our  present 
■municipalities.  .  .  .  Other  industries  would  more 
properly  belong  to  a  community  the  size  of  a  modern 
state,  or  perhaps  of  a  county  or  township.  ...  If 
further  economic  development  should  show  that  there 
are  fields  of  industry  in  which  concentration  is  not 
economical  and  in  which  exploitation  can  be  abolished 
and  production  furthered  by  the  retention  of  private 
ownership  in  certain  instruments  of  production,  such 

*  Hillquit,  op.  cit.,  p.  32;  Vandervelde,  Collectivism,  p.  135;  Kaut- 
sky, Morrow  of  Social  Revolution,  p.  166. 


OF   THE   PRESENT   DAY  133; 

ownership  is  In  no  way  at  variance  with  the  princi- 
ples of  the  socialist  philosophy."  ^ 

The  legislative  plan  of  the  Social  Democratic  fac- 
tion in  the  Wisconsin  Legislature  makes  its  first 
policy  direct  legislation  and  home  rule  for  local  units 
of  government;  and  the  Municipal  Program  of  New 
York  declares  for  local  self-government  for  the  city, 
against  government  by  boards  and  commissions,  for 
the  initiative,  referendum,  and  recall,  and  for  the 
extension  of  the  powers  of  the  city  so  as  to  enable 
it  to  engage  freely  in  industrial  or  public  works.^ 

Spargo  comes  to  the  following  conclusion  with  re- 
gard to  the  forms  of  production  under  Socialism :  — ■ 

"  The  economic  organization  of  the  Socialist  state 
would  consist,  then,  of  three  distinct  forms,  as  fol- 
lows: I.  Private  production  and  exchange,  subject 
only  to  such  general  supervision  and  control  by  the 
state  as  the  interests  of  society  demand,  such  as 
protection  against  monopolization,  sanitary  laws, 
and  the  like;  2.  voluntary  cooperation,  subject  to 
similar  supervision  and  control;  3.  production  and 
exchange  by  the  state,  the  administration  to  be  by 
the  autonomous  organizations  of  the  workers  In  in- 
dustrial groups,  subject  to  the  laws  and  government 
of  society  as  a  whole."  ^ 

We  have  then,  as  the  foundation  of  the  Socialist 
industrial  structure,  a  series  of  autonomous  indus- 
trial groups,  electing  their  own  minor  officers,  but 
generally  subject  to  the  political  government.  Be- 
yond this  point  the  Marxists  have  refused  to  do  more 

*  Am.  Farmer,  p.  69,  209. 

«  Gaylord  in  N.  Y.  Call,  Jan.  16,  1910;  N.  Y.  Mun.  Prog. 

'  Socialism,  p.  227. 


134  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

than  speculate,  although  the  Utopian  Mackaye  has 
presented  a  minute  plan  of  organization  in  his  Pan- 
tocracy.^  The  State  Socialist  Menger  suggests  that 
the  municipality  possess  the  power  of  appointing  or 
discharging  the  managers  of  the  labor  group,  and 
the  Fabians  expect  that  these  "  captains  of  industry  " 
would  rise  through  the  various  sub-groups  until  the 
group  heads  should  form  an  industrial  cabinet  re- 
sponsible only  to  the  sovereign  democracy.^  These 
in  turn  may  have  relations  with  similar  officers  in 
other  lands  until  a  complete  international  coopera- 
tive structure  is  formed.^ 

As  is  natural,  those  Socialists  who  emphasize  po- 
litical action  and  those  who  place  their  reliance  on  the 
Industrial  union  differ  as  to  the  point  at  which,  if  at 
all,  the  industrial  groups  should  become  subordinate 
to  the  political  power,  and  thus  as  to  the  method  of 
electing  their  officers,  whether  by  vote  of  the  political 
or  the  industrial  constituency.  Hillquit  evidently  con- 
siders the  latter  the  typical  position,  as  he  writes :  — 

"  The  notion  that  the  Industrial  affairs  of  the  so- 
cialist state  will  not  be  administered  by  officers 
elected  by  general  popular  vote,  but  by  men  chosen 
by  the  members  of  each  separate  trade  and  calling 
for  their  experience  and  general  qualifications  is  gen- 
erally accepted  by  the  Socialists."  ^ 

While  American  Socialists,  then,  are  agreed  that 
the  productive  organization  of  the  future  is  to  be 
a  natural  outgrowth  of  capitalist  industry,  that  de- 
centralization and  local  autonomy  are  essential  to 

'  Economy  of  Happiness,  p.  429,  seq. 

'  Mcnpcr,  quoted  in  Hillquit,  op.  cit.,  p.  136. 

'  A.  Bcsant,  quoted  ibid.,  p.  143.  *  Ibid.;  p.  \*2. 


OF   THE   PRESENT    DAY  135 

democracy,  and  that  further  details  may  be  classed 
as  Utopian,  there  is  a  difference  of  opinion  between 
the  emphasizers  of  political  action  on  the  one  hand 
and  industrial  unionism  on  the  other  as  to  whether 
the  labor  union  or  the  state-owned  industry  will  fur- 
nish the  dominant  form  of  organization. 

Since  the  Socialist  society  is  to  be  a  development 
from  the  capitalist  regime,  rather  than  a  return  to 
primitive  economic  conditions,  the  present  rate  of 
industrial  progress  must  be  expected,  and  the  main- 
tenance of  this  rate  will  depend  upon  the  existence 
of  adequate  incentive  to  labor  and  its  efficient 
assignment. 

The  two  problems  of  incentive  and  assignment, 
with  the  closely  related  topic  of  remuneration,  have 
supplied  the  chief  material  for  the  popular  oppo- 
nents of  Socialism,  and  have  illustrated  the  develop- 
ment of  Socialist  ideas  as  to  equality  of  ability  and 
of  Income.  While  there  have  always  been  antago- 
nists to  charge  the  Socialists  with  asserting  the  actual 
equality  of  all  men,  this  assertion  has  usually  been  to 
the  Socialist,  as  to  the  American,  an  attractive  figure 
of  speech.  Both  may  inadvertently  bring  It  forward 
in  campaign  oratory,  but  neither  will  hold  to  it  in 
sober  writing.  It  is  difficult  to  find  the  claim  of 
equality  put  forth  by  any  Socialist  author,  while  G.  B. 
Shaw  goes  to  the  opposite  extreme  in  his  advocacy 
of  eugenics  and  Enrico  Ferri  refuses  even  to  admit 
the  natural  equality  of  the  sexes. ^ 

"  Socialism,"  according  to  Spargo,  "  instead  of 
being  defined  as  an  attempt  to  make  men  equal, 
might  perhaps  be  more  accurately  and  justly  defined 

*  Ferri,  op.  cit.,  p.  20,  note. 


136  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

as  a  social  system  based  upon  the  natural  Inequalities 
of  mankind.  Not  human  equality,  but  equality  of 
opportunity  to  prevent  the  creation  of  artificial  ine- 
qualities by  privilege  is  the  essence  of  Socialism."  * 

Hillquit  expresses  himself  similarly  to  the  effect 
that  the  chief  defect  of  our  present  social  legislation 
is  in  the  assumption  of  universal  equality  which 
tends  in  practice  to  sanction  the  power  of  the  strong 
against  the  weak.^ 

Although  the  American  Socialists  thus  repudiate 
the  notion  of  absolute  equality,  they  are,  as  a  result 
of  their  belief  in  economic  determinism,  as  vigorously 
opposed  to  the  "  great  man  theory,"  while  they  re- 
fuse to  admit  any  present  ratio  between  the  incomes 
and  the  abilities  of  men,  and  lend  a  cordial  ear  to 
all  evidence  tending  to  minimize  human  inequality. 
Hillquit  argues  against  Mallock's  doctrine  of  ability 
on  the  Marxian  ground  that  social  forces,  rather  than 
the  individual,  are  chiefly  responsible  for  achieve- 
ment, and  Socialist  lecturers  and  reviewers  have 
greeted  with  enthusiasm  the  egalitarian  arguments 
of  Ward's  Applied  Sociology.^ 

Equality  of  Income,  like  equality  of  nature,  is  a 
notion  relegated  by  modern  Socialists  to  their  mo- 
ments of  millennial  reverie.  Marx,  as  has  been  said, 
contemplated  two  states  of  the  future,  one,  with  a 
mere  approximation  to  equality,  to  follow  the  social 
revolution,  and  another,  where  communistic  distribu- 
tion should  rule,  to  be  developed  from  a  long-conr 
tinued  Socialist  society.^     Beyond  this  general  ex- 

*  Socialism,  p.  236. 

*  Socialism  in  Theory  and  Practice,  p.  81, 

*  Ward,  op.  cit.,  p.  239,  seq. 

*  Marx,  On  the  Gotha  Programme,  p.  649  (Quoted  by  Skelton,  op. 
cit.,  p.  202). 


OF   THE   PRESENT    DAY  137 

pectation  of  a  tendency  toward  communism  to  arise 
in  the  remote  future,  Socialists  are  agreed  in  repu- 
diating the  claim  for  equality  of  income  in  the  So- 
cialist commonwealth. 

"  Just  and  feasible,"  writes  Hillquit,  "  as  this  ideal 
of  distribution  may  be,  it  is  to-day  nevertheless  a 
mere  ideal,  a  hope  to  be  realized  in  the  more  or  less 
distant  future.  It  is  not  a  part  of  the  present  pro- 
gram of  the  socialist  movement.  Modern  socialists 
recognize  that  the  methods  of  distribution  under  the 
new  order  of  things  must  take  for  their  starting- 
point  the  present  methods,  i.  e.,  payments  of  varying 
:wages  or  salaries  for  services  rendered."  ^ 

Since  there  is  among  American  Socialists  a  free 
recognition  of  the  inequality  of  individual  powers, 
a  repudiation  of  the  claim  of  equality  of  income, 
and  an  insistence  upon  the  development  of  Socialist 
conditions  from  those  of  the  final  stages  of  capital- 
ism, there  seems  thus  far  to  be  no  incompatibility 
between  the  contemplated  Socialist  state  and  the 
principle  of  competition  in  the  field  of  labor.  That 
there  is  a  manifest  hesitancy,  however,  to  acknowl- 
edge the  presence  of  this  principle  in  the  ultimate 
commonwealth,  is  suggested  by  an  examination  of 
current  Socialist  replies  to  inquiries  as  to  incentive, 
assignment  of  work,  and  remuneration. 

While  as  a  Marxian  the  Socialist  may  and  often 
does  consistently  refuse  to  offer  a  solution  to  these 
problems,  as  an  advocate  he  finds  himself  obliged  to 
oppose  some  positive  ideal  to  the  false  creations  of 
antagonists.  The  ideals  most  emphasized  appear  to 
be  largely  Utopian,  as  based  upon  conditions  of  in- 

*  Op.  cit.,  p.  118 


138  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

dustry  and  human  nature  that  could  be  perfected  only 
in  the  far-away  period  of  communism. 

The  first  incentive  held  out  by  the  party  Socialist 
of  all  shades  of  belief  is  usually  that  of  pleasure  in 
labor.  A.  M.  Simons,  after  a  careful  analysis  of  the 
past  in  Class  Struggles  in  America^  dismisses  the 
future  with  the  rhapsody:  — 

"  Marvelous  mechanical  creations,  the  fruits  of 
America's  inventive  genius,  controlled  and  operated 
by  a  nation  of  skilled  workers,  can  transform  these 
natural  resources  into  forms  that  will  meet  every 
want  of  mind  or  body  at  an  expenditure  of  human 
energy  so  slight  that  it  will  no  longer  be  avoided  as 
distasteful  toil,  but  will  be  looked  upon  as  joyous 
play."  1 

J.  M.  Work  speaks  in  glowing  terms  of  the  joy 
of  effort  and  the  ecstasy  of  achievement,  and  finishes 
his  chapter  on  incentive  with  the  vague  sentence :  — 

"  Meantime,  Socialism  will  provide  a  varied  multi- 
tude of  lesser  incentives,  including  the  incentive  to 
secure  several  times  as  large  an  income  as  the  aver- 
age man  is  getting  now."  ^ 

Even  Spargo,  in  his  propaganda  book.  The  Social- 
ists^ although  giving  an  emphatic  denial  of  the  claim 
for  equal  remuneration,  seems  to  evade  the  question 
of  material  incentive  by  speaking  of  rewards  "  which 
men  will  strive  after  more  earnestly  than  they  could 
strive  for  gold."  ^ 

An  additional  incentive  to  that  of  enjoyment  in 
labor  is  that  of  interest  in  the  joint  product,  implied 

1  P.  32.  *  Op.  cit.,  p.  42,  43. 

»  P.  119. 


OF   THE   PRESENT    DAY  139 

by  Debs,  and  by  Work  in  the  quotation  given  above. ^ 
The  Socialist  reasons  that,  since  each  worker  will 
share  in  the  product  equally  or  proportionally,  it  is 
to  his  interest  to  make  this  product  as  large  as  pos- 
sible, and  so  he  will  toil  to  his  full  capacity  and  see 
that  his  neighbor  does  the  same.  Theoretically,  this 
would  doubtless  take  place,  but  as  Schaeffle  has 
pointed  out,  if  a  million  workers  are  to  share  the 
reward  and  the  shirking  of  one  laborer  merely  de- 
creases the  total  by  a  millionth,  the  prospect  of  losing 
the  millionth  part  of  a  millionth  is  not  likely  to  prove 
an  adequate  spur  to  labor. 

Thinking  Socialists  recognize  this  difficulty,  and 
even  those  who  elsewhere  seem  to  place  reliance  upon 
the  attractiveness  of  labor,  frankly  supplement  the 
idealistic  incentive,  in  their  more  comprehensive 
writings,  with  the  economic  one  of  shorter  hours 
and  higher  pay.  While  such  motives  as  ambition, 
patriotism,  and  disinterested  love  of  art  or  science 
will,  according  to  these  Socialists,  be  operative  far 
more  than  at  present  in  all  higher  forms  of  work, 
there  will  be  need  of  a  material  spur,  at  least  in  the 
earlier  stages  of  Socialism,  to  call  forth  the  efforts  of 
the  ordinary  toiler. 

Although  Spargo,  in  the  passage  previously 
quoted,  makes  no  definite  mention  of  other  than  im- 
material incentives,  yet  in  his  larger  book,  Socialism, 
he  explains  that  under  the  cooperative  common- 
wealth men  could  easily  be  led  by  higher  remunera- 
tion to  undertake  less  pleasant  work  than  what  they 
would  otherwise  choose.^ 

J.  M.  Work,  too,  while  wholly  idealistic  In  his 
*'  Incentive  "  chapter,  yet  declares  elsewhere:  — 

*  Debs,  The  Issue,  p.  15.  *  Socialism,  p.  232. 


I40  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

"  Devotees  of  capitalism  who  are  so  absurdly  fear- 
ful lest  Socialism  should  destroy  incentive  will  please 
note  that  this  method  retains  the  incentive  to  gain 
a  higher  income  or  shorter  hours."  ^ 

The  problem  of  incentive  is  thus  met  directly  with 
solutions  that  are  largely  Utopian.  Only  in  the  writ- 
ings of  the  younger  Socialists,  by  comparing  the  state- 
ments as  to  incentive  with  those  elsewhere  on  the 
subject  of  equality,  do  we  see  a  tendency  to  supple- 
ment the  idealistic  incentive,  as  at  present,  with  that 
of  competition  for  material  rewards,  subject  to  the 
modifications  that  would  naturally  arise  from  the 
new  social  order. 

Closely  bound  up  with  the  problem  of  incentive 
is  that  of  the  assignment  of  labor  under  Socialism. 
Even  if  we  grant  the  existence  of  an  efficient  motive 
for  labor  in  all  men,  the  question  as  to  differences  in 
skill  and  ability  still  remains.  If  every  man  should 
be  permitted  to  choose  his  own  task  under  the  Social- 
ist regime,  efficient  adjustment  would  not  thereby  be 
assured,  for  taste  does  not  always  mean  ability,  and, 
aside  from  differences  in  capacity,  we  have  the  time- 
honored  problem  of  the  distasteful  and  dangerous 
work.  Fourier's  ingenious  notion  of  making  the 
children  the  scavengers  because  of  their  predilection 
for  dirt  would  hardly  tally  with  modern  pedagogics, 
and  if  we  trusted  to  disinterested  patriotism  it  might 
well  be  that  the  hero  best  fitted  to  rule  the  industrial 
councils  would  immolate  himself  in  a  coal-mine,  and 
vice  versa. 

Scientific  socialism  is  here  silent:  there  is  nothing 
in  the  inevitable  tendency  of  industrial  development 

*  Op.  cit.,  p.  io6. 


OF   THE   PRESENT   DAY  141 

that  points  to  any  Socialist  method  of  assigning  labor 
other  than  the  present  method  of  competition.  Here, 
as  elsewhere,  however,  there  is  apparent  among 
present-day  Socialists  an  acknowledgment  of  the 
necessity  of  a  degree  of  competition,  with  a  clinging 
as  far  as  possible  to  the  old  Utopian  arguments. 
Spargo  suggests  that  the  men  of  science  might  safely 
be  entrusted  with  the  dirty  work  because  of  their 
ability  to  minimize  it  by  inventions,  and  Work  humor- 
ously volunteers  to  do  it  himself  because  of  the  short 
hours  attached  to  it  and  the  consequent  opportunity 
for  scholastic  leisure;  it  is  almost  reluctantly  that 
each  one  finally  reminds  us  of  the  practical  expedient 
of  raising  the  remuneration  for  unpleasant  or  danger- 
ous occupations.^ 

Neither  of  these  authors  makes  the  additional 
obvious  suggestion  that  the  work  that  is  both  un- 
skilled and  unpleasant  be  left  to  those  who  are  unfit 
for  other  tasks,  and,  in  the  same  way,  though  both 
have  admitted  competition  and  inequality  in  general, 
neither  attempts  to  solve  the  problem  of  ability  by 
referring  to  these  two  possibihties.  Spargo  appears 
to  leave  the  matter  to  individual  choice,  confident 
that  most  men  prefer  to  do  the  things  for  which  they 
are  best  fitted,  and  Work  merely  implies  a  competi- 
tive assignment  of  ability  when  he  says :  — 

"  The  man  who  has  a  genius  for  managing  indus- 
tries will  be  sure  of  a  good  job  in  the  Socialist 
commonwealth."  ^ 

The  hesitation  of  American  writers  in  admitting 
the  need  of  external  tests   for  the   assignment  of 

*  Spargo,  Socialism,  Rev.,  p.  311;   Work,  op.  cit.,  p.  74. 

*  Spargo,  Socialism,  Rev.,  p.  312;  Work,  op.  cit.,  p.  69. 


142  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

labor,  and  in  applying  the  acknowledged  principle 
of  competition  to  the  other  acknowledged  principle 
of  inequality  of  ability  and  of  Income,  reflects  that 
of  Kautsky's  Social  Revolution.  While  the  German 
author  freely  applies  the  competitive  principle  to  the 
quantitative  problem  of  labor  adjustment  by  reducing 
wages  in  congested  trades  and  raising  them  in  those 
needing  laborers,  he  makes  no  definite  suggestion  as 
to  competition  in  the  qualitative  adjustment  of  tasks 
to  varying  abilities.^ 

Among  the  "  ultra-proletarians,"  on  the  other 
hand,  there  is  a  tendency  to  take  the  position  of 
Bebel,  who  counsels  that  all  men  and  women  be  re- 
quired to  perform  daily  a  certain  amount  of  "  pro- 
ductive "  work,  Implying  that  only  manual  labor  at 
some  form  of  industry  or  agriculture  be  so  termed.^ 
The  suggestion  is  a  deduction  from  the  hypothesis  of 
a  proletarian  conquest  of  society,  but  its  Utopian 
character  is  evident  in  its  departure  from  the  Marx- 
ian definition  of  labor  as  both  mental  and  manual 
exertion,  and  in  its  running  counter  to  the  economic 
tendency  of  specialization.^ 

The  point  of  view  here  Indicated  is  probably  due 
less  to  the  proletarian  theories  of  Marx  than  to  the 
apotheosis  of  the  manual  laborer  as  such  which  occa- 
sionally appears  in  the  modern  movement.  A  recent 
controversy  Illustrates  the  connection  of  the  fore- 
going speculations  as  to  assignment  of  labor  with  the 
"  proletarian-Intellectual  "  discussion  In  the  Socialist 
Party.  The  New  York  Call  made  the  following  edi- 
torial comment:  — 


»  Soc.  Rev.,  p.  134  (Kerr  Ed.) 

'  Bebel,  Woman  under  Socialism,  p.  275,  290. 

»  Marx,  Capital,  Vol.  I.  p.  7,  in  (Humboldt  Ed.). 


OF   THE   PRESENT    DAY  143 

"  In  a  Socialist  state  of  society  every  one  would 
have  to  do  part  of  the  work  required  in  the  social 
productive  process;  .  .  .  therefore,  no  one  would 
have  to  do  manual  labor  for  more  than  a  few  hours 
a  day;  .  .  .  everybody  would  consequently  be  free 
to  develop  his  physical  and  intellectual  faculties;  and 
.  .  .  therefore,  there  will,  under  Socialism,  be  no 
intellectuals  and  no  manual  laborers."  ^ 

The  reply  of  W.  J.  Ghent  included  the  follow- 
ing:— 

"  No  one,  it  seems  to  me,  who  bases  his  picture 
of  Socialism  on  observed  facts  and  tendencies  in 
present-day  life,  rather  than  on  Utopian  dreams,  can 
doubt  that  Socialism  will  bring  about  a  greater  and 
more  widely  prevalent  specialization  of  function  than 
we  know  to-day.  .  .  .  No  normal  man  unobsessed 
by  an  ultra-proletarian  view  of  life,  can  picture  an  effi- 
cient and  civilized  state  in  which  thousands  and  thou- 
sands of  men  are  not  set  apart  to  do  intellectual 
work." 

The  editor  reiterated  his  original  point  of  view, 
however,  with  the  addition  that 

"  These  mere  '  intellectuals,'  who  are  not  Darwins 
and  Marxes,  will  have  to  do  their  share  of  social 
productive  labor,  even  if  Socialist  society  will  have 
to  do  without  some  of  their  brilliant  —  or  other  — 
efforts."  2 

Among  present-day  Marxians,  accordingly,  we 
find  either  a  refusal  to  consider  the  problem  of  as- 
signment of  labor,  a  somewhat  hesitating  acknowl- 
edgment of  competition,  or  an  Implication  of  com- 

^  N.  Y.  Call,  Nov.  30,  1909.  *  Ibid.,  Dec.  4,  1909. 


144  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

pulsor}''  rotation  in  tasks,  traceable  rather  to  respect 
for  the  manual  worker  than  to  the  deductions  of 
Marxian  theory. 

A  contrast  to  the  indefiniteness  of  Marxism  in  this 
matter  is  found  in  the  writings  of  the  non-party 
American  Socialist,  Gronlund,  and  of  the  English 
Fabians.^  These  authors  expect  to  see  under  the 
socialist  regime  a  subdivision  of  labor  as  at  present, 
with  separate  persons  in  general  performing  manual 
and  professional  work.  Tasks  are  to  be  assigned  by 
the  industrial  authorities  upon  the  principle  of  com- 
petition, as  in  the  present  civil  service,  but  a  fair 
minimum  wage  is  to  be  guaranteed  to  every  worker 
and  irksomeness  is  to  be  equalized  as  far  as  possible. 
If  to  this  method  is  added  the  election  of  the  higher 
officers  of  production  by  the  members  of  the  indus- 
trial group,  the  Fabian  believes  that  the  State  de- 
partments may  hope  for  efficiency  at  least  equal  to 
that  of  the  trust  of  to-day.^ 

It  is  significant  that,  while  the  American  Marxians 
acknowledge  the  impossibility  of  forecasting  with 
accuracy  the  solution  of  the  problems  of  incentive 
and  assignment,  they  yet,  when  confronted  with  these 
problems,  bring  forward  plans  that  must  be  desig- 
nated as  Utopian.  It  is  by  the  non-Marxian  Social- 
ists, on  the  other  hand,  that  we  have  clearly  formu- 
lated a  system,  tentative,  to  be  sure,  but  more  nearly 
scientific,  in  that  it  continues  to  base  the  industrial 
fabric  upon  competition  in  the  field  of  labor,  until  it 
can  be  shown  that  this  force,  like  that  of  capitalist 
competition,  is  according  to  Socialist  principles  des- 
tined to  disappear. 

*  Gronlund,  New  Econ.,  p.  48;  Shaw,  Fabian  Essays,  p.  182. 
'  Shaw,  Fabian  Essays,  p.  182. 


OF  THE   PRESENT   DAY  14^. 

The  extreme  democratic  ideal  In  the  American 
movement  is  doubtless  largely  responsible  for  the 
lapses  into  Utopianism  which  run  through  the  ulti- 
mate economic  program.  The  Socialist  leader,  who 
is  usually  an  "  intellectual  "  or  a  skilled  worker,  hesi- 
tates to  claim  for  those  like  himself  positions  of 
reward  and  power  denied  to  his  comrades,  the  man- 
ual laborers.  Accordingly,  he  is  inclined  either  to 
pass  lightly  over  the  subject  of  dliferences  in  ability 
in  assignment  of  tasks,  or  boldly  to  disregard  these 
differences  by  requiring  manual  labor  from  all. 

Although  just  distribution  is  the  aim  of  Socialism, 
we  have  in  regard  to  its  details,  as  in  those  of  pro- 
duction, the  same  silence  on  the  part  of  the  older 
Marxists,  the  same  elaborate  specifications  by  the 
Utopians,  the  same  misunderstanding  by  non-social- 
ists, and  here,  too,  the  beginning  of  definite  outlines 
by  the  younger  thinkers. 

Though  the  expectation  of  divldlng-up  has  existed 
only  In  the  minds  of  ill-informed  opponents,  the  So- 
cialists of  the  middle  19th  century  usually  took  for 
granted  a  pure  communism  with  the  motto,  — 
"  From  every  man  according  to  his  powers,  to  every 
man  according  to  his  wants,"  Fourier  being  an  excep- 
tion with  his  elaborate  distributive  system  allowing 
for  Interest  and  rent  of  ability.^  Present-day  Social- 
ists, on  the  contrary,  consign  distribution  according 
to  needs,  as  they  consign  equality  of  distribution,  to 
the  far-off  communism  that  may  perhaps  develop  out 
of  the  successful  cooperative  commonwealth.^ 

The  right  to  the  whole  produce  of  labor  is  often 
taken  to  be  the  Marxian  theory  of  distribution,  and 

*  Kirkup,  op.  cit,,  p.  9. 

*  Hillquit,  op.  cit.,  p.  117;  Spargo,  Socialism,  p.  233. 


146  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

as  such  Is  made  by  Menger  the  essence  of  Socialism.* 
Marx  claimed  no  abstract  rights,  however,  and, 
though  the  possession  of  the  whole  product  by  the 
class  of  laborers  must  be  a  necessary  incident  of  the 
seizure  of  industry  by  the  proletariat,  the  modern 
Socialist  makes  no  such  claim  for  the  individual.  On 
the  contrary,  it  is  frequently  contended  that  under 
the  developed  industrial  system  the  contribution  of 
the  individual  is  untraceable  in  the  social  product. 

Upon  the  foundation  of  Marx's  theory  of  value 
as  the  crystallization  of  labor  time,  a  distinctly  Social- 
ist scheme  of  distribution  was  at  one  time  proposed. 
Marx  himself  gave  a  mere  suggestion  of  the  plan, 
which  Rodbertus  elaborated  into  the  system  of 
labor-checlcs.2  Since  the  value  of  a  commodity  is  ex- 
actly measured  by  the  socially  necessary  or  average 
number  of  labor-hours  embodied  in  it,  the  logical 
payment  to  the  workman  is  a  certificate  or  check  stat- 
ing that  he  has  worked  a  certain  number  of  hours, 
and  exchangeable  for  any  commodity  embodying  the 
specified  amount  of  labor-time.  This  method,  as 
worked  out  by  Rodbertus,  must  be  modified  by  the 
circumstance  that  the  final  cost  of  an  article  is  made 
up  of  various  labor-costs,  —  that  of  raw  material, 
machinery,  etc.,  —  that  skilled  labor  would  count  as 
a  multiple  of  unskilled,  and  that  several  subtractions 
must  be  made  from  the  value  of  each  check  to  allow 
for  the  maintenance  of  the  state,  of  communistic 
property,  of  capital  and  reserve  funds,  and  of  the  • 
incapacitated  members  of  society.  Thus  a  workman 
who  labored  for  five  hours  might  receive  a  check 
exchangeable  for  only  four  hours'  embodied  labor, 

*  Ripht  to  the  Whole  Produce  of  Labor,  p.  7. 

'  On  the  Gotha  Programme,  p.  648  (Quoted  by  Skelton,  op.  cit.i 
p.  206,  note). 


OF   THE   PRESENT   DAY  147 

but,  if  a  skilled  artisan  or  professional  man,  for  eight 
or  nine.  On  the  other  hand,  the  subtraction  might 
be  made  by  setting  a  high  valuation  in  labor-hours 
upon  the  article  to  be  purchased.^ 

Consistently  Marxian  as  the  labor  check  system 
may  appear,  it  labors  under  the  error  of  ascribing 
permanency  and  ethical  force  to  what  Marx  formu- 
lated merely  as  a  law  of  economic  process  during  the 
transitory  capitalist  regime.  For  this  reason  and  be- 
cause of  its  obvious  impracticability,  the  modern 
Socialist  has  already  dropped  it  from  his  ultimate 
plan.  Spargo  speaks  of  the  labor  notes  and  the  abo- 
lition of  coined  money  as  "  early  Utopian  "  plans, 
and  Hillquit  characterizes  the  scheme  as 

"  on  a  par  with  that  of  the  '  equitable  labor  exchange 
banks,'  the  communistic  societies  and  the  other  social 
experiments  of  the  Utopian  socialists."  ^ 

In  popular  pamphlets  we  may  still  see  allusions  to 
gold  money  as  the  "  yellow  relic  of  barbarism,"  and 
to  the  certificate  of  value  equal  to  the  product  of  the 
worker,  but  the  creators  of  Socialist  thought  in 
Europe  and  America  have  definitely  repudiated 
them.^ 

Having  passed  permanently  out  of  the  advocacy 
of  equality,  distribution  according  to  needs,  and  com- 
pensation by  labor  time,  the  Socialists  are  left  without 
a  peculiar  plan  of  distribution,  and  the  vanguard,  as 
already  indicated,  have  begun  to  admit  that  the  com- 
petitive system  of  wages  and  values  must  exist  in  the 
new  commonwealth  until  the  remote  period  when 

*  See  Schaeffle,  Impossibility  of  Social  Democracy,  p.  53,  seq. 

'  Spargo,  Socialism,  p.  234;    Hillquit,_  op.  cit.,  p.  118. 

'  Richardson,   Introduction  to  Socialism,  p.  22;  Debs,  The  Issue, 

p-s. 


148  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

communism  may  arise.  Spargo  and  Hillqult,  accord- 
ingly, accept  without  reserve  Kautsky's  belief  that 
unequal  money  wages  will  be  the  Socialist  method  of 
remuneration  for  labor.^ 

J.  M.  Work  sums  up  the  present  Socialist  position 
as  follows :  — 

"  The  universal  introduction  of  labor-saving  ma- 
chinery and  the  consequent  division  of  labor,  have 
made  the  production  of  men  so  nearly  equal  that  the 
difference  in  incomes  will  not  be  large.  But,  in  so 
far  as  there  is  a  difference,  it  can  be  accurately  ascer- 
tained by  permitting  free  play  to  the  law  of  supply 
and  demand.  The  compensation  in  any  given  occu- 
pation can  be  raised,  or,  what  amounts  to  the  same 
thing,  the  hours  can  be  shortened,  until  exactly  the 
right  number  of  men  are  attracted  to  that  occupation. 
.  .  .  Add  to  this  the  fact  that  the  workers  in  any 
industry  can  dock  anyone  who  shirks,  and  you  have 
an  accurate  method  of  giving  each  worker  the  actual 
value  of  his  work,  without  any  slavish  figuring  and 
calculating."  ^ 

It  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  this  admission  of 
economic  competition  in  the  Socialist  state  is  of  recent 
date,  even  among  the  progressive  writers,  and,  as  was 
before  mentioned,  is  seldom  applied  to  the  problems 
of  incentive  or  qualitative  assignment.  The  earliest 
unreserved  avowal  to  this  effect  that  I  have  seen  is  in 
an  article  by  Raphael  Buck,  The  Remuneration  of 
Labor  in  the  Cooperative  Commonwealth^  published 
in  The  International  Socialist  Review  for  July,  1903. 

*  Kautsky,  Social  Revolution,  p.  134;  Spargo,  Socialism,  p.  235; 
Hillquit,  op.  cit.,  p.  I18-II9. 

*  Op.  cit.,  p.  106. 


OF   THE   PRESENT   DAY  149 

An  indication  of  the  Utopianism  prevailing  even  at 
that  time  among  Socialist  writers  is  given  in  the  com- 
ment upon  the  article  by  A.  M.  Simons,  then  the 
editor  of  the  review :  — 

"  At  the  same  time  it  is  our  opinion  that  the  prob- 
lem which  he  postulates  is  really  unimportant  and 
that  the  solution  which  he  offers  is  by  no  means  a 
probable  one.  .  .  .  The  incentive  to  labor  under 
socialism  must  be  found,  not  in  some  external  force 
which  will  drive  the  laborer  to  his  work,  but  in  the 
inherent  attractiveness  of  the  work  itself.  The  social 
energies  will  necessarily  be  concentrated  on  the  prob- 
lem of  removing  the  disagreeable  features  from  toil. 
Anyone  who  knows  something  of  the  spirit  of  crafts- 
manship as  it  has  already  existed  at  different  times 
on  the  face  of  the  earth,  and  who  is  in  any  degree 
familiar  with  modern  psychology,  will  at  once  ad- 
mit that  the  problem  is  really  so  slight  as  to  be 
insignificant."  ^ 

The  determination  of  commodity  values  furnishes 
a  companion  problem  to  the  method  of  remuneration, 
and  enters  with  it  into  the  adjustment  of  real  wages. 
Under  a  regime  of  unequal  salaries  and  labor- 
periods,  it  is  not  hard  to  conceive  of  a  competitive 
wage  scale  more  or  less  automatic,  subject  to  the  will 
of  the  people  concerning  maximum  and  minimum. 
With  regard  to  commodity  prices,  however,  there 
could  be  little  real  Socialist  competition,  for,  even 
granting  decentralization,  the  cooperative  state  can 
only  escape  the  present  "  planlessness  "  by  so  direct- 
ing industry  as  to  avoid  sectional  rivalry  for  markets. 

»  I.  S.  R.,  July,  1903. 


150  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

We  have  already  reached  a  point  In  industry  where  a 
large  proportion  of  our  staple  values  tend  to  be  ad- 
justed, in  part  at  least,  by  the  monopoly  rather  than 
the  competitive  principle;  and  we  are  fast  entering 
another  stage  where  certain  of  these,  such  as  gas, 
railroad  rates,  and  protected  products,  are  no  longer 
left  to  be  settled  by  the  monopoly  principle,  —  the 
point  of  maximum  profit,  —  but  by  the  arbitrary 
standard  of  what  the  government  will  permit.  In 
any  event,  the  Socialist  state  would  indefinitely  ex- 
tend this  category,  and,  aside  from  the  utility  of 
such  a  development,  it  is  of  importance  to  know 
whether  an  automatic  law  of  value  would  still  be 
operative,  or  whether  the  state  would  be  compelled 
arbitrarily  to  fix  all  values.  Work  mentions  the  prob- 
lem of  value,  to  say  that  these  state-fixed  values  tend 
to  be  adjusted  automatically  on  the  labor-time  prin- 
ciple, and  it  is  probable  that  in  this  opinion  he  is 
representative  of  the  orthodox  Marxian.^ 

The  subject  of  production  and  distribution  in 
the  ultimate  program  has  been  but  inconsistently 
dealt  with  by  American  Socialists.  The  organiza- 
tion, indeed,  has  been  partly  determined,  as  a  deduc- 
tion from  the  proletarian  character  of  the  common- 
wealth, to  consist  of  autonomous  industrial  groups, 
as  decentralized  as  the  course  of  economic  develop- 
ment will  allow.  The  relation  of  these  groups  to  the 
political  state  will  depend  upon  whether  the  future 
course  of  the  Socialist  movement  is  to  be  mainly  in- 
dustrial or  political.  Regarding  the  problems  of 
incentive,  assignment,  and  remuneration,  the  Marx- 
ians have  declined  to  set  forth  any  doctrines  as  au- 
thoritative, on  the  ground  that  solutions  must  arise 

'  J.  M.  Work,  op.  cit.,  p.  112. 


OF   THE   PRESENT   DAY  151: 

from  the  natural  course  of  economic  development. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  misstatements  of  popular  anti- 
socialists  have  evoked  in  Marxian  propaganda  tenta- 
tive solutions  of  these  problems,  which  are  often 
Utopian  in  character,  owing  in  part  to  the  exaltation 
of  unskilled  labor  in  the  modern  Socialist  parties. 
Among  the  Fabians  and  younger  Marxians,  how- 
ever, there  is  the  beginning  of  more  scientific  work  In 
the  basing  of  the  Socialist  industrial  system  upon  the 
already  existing  principle  of  competition  among 
labor  of  different  grades.  While  the  party  programs 
include  no  definite  proposals  as  to  the  future  common- 
wealth, and  while  scientific  socialism  sanctions  no 
prognostications  except  those  based  upon  manifest 
economic  tendencies,  the  Socialist  propaganda  is  de- 
manding a  positive  outline  to  oppose  to  the  "  Socialist 
specter  "  set  up  by  its  opponents;  and  it  is  upon  the 
elaboration  of  an  ultimate  program  free  from  Uto- 
pian vagaries  and,  although  tentative,  yet  in  harmony 
with  economic  development,  that  the  future  of  Social- 
ism as  a  voluntary  movement  will  largely  depend. 


CHAPTER  XI 

THE  ULTIMATE  POLITICAL  AND  SOCIAL  PROGRAM 
OF  SOCIALISM 

While  the  expropriation  of  the  capitalist  by 
society  is  a  distinctive  feature  of  Socialism,  yet  the 
fact  that  this  society  is  to  consist  of  the  trium- 
phant proletariat  is  by  Marxians  considered  equally 
essential.  The  State  Socialists  who,  concentrating 
attention  upon  the  collectivization  of  industry,  ex- 
pect, like  Lassalle,  that  the  transformation  will 
come  about  by  the  aid  of  the  present  political  state, 
are  counted  as  enemies  by  the  Socialist  parties  of  the 
world;  and  the  Socialists  of  America  give  but  grudg- 
ing approval  to  any  instalment  of  socialization  that 
is  introduced  by  the  government  as  now  existing.^ 

The  attitude  of  Socialists  toward  the  state  is  so 
frequently  misunderstood  that  we  find  them  popularly 
classed  sometimes  with  anarchists  and  sometimes 
with  bureaucrats.  It  is  true  that  Socialism  aims 
definitely  at  the  enlargement  of  government  func- 
tions, opposes  anarchism  with  vigor,  and  works 
through  the  channels  of  legitimate  politics. 

"  The  history  of  the  Socialist  movement,"  says 
Spargo,  "  is  in  large  part  the  history  of  a  struggle 
with  Anarchism.     The  result  is  seen  to-day  in  the 

*  See  Bernstein,  Ferd.  Lassalle,  p.  185. 


AMERICAN    SOCIALISM  153 

fact  that  wherever  Socialism  is  strong,  as  in  Ger- 
many, for  example,  Anarchism  is  a  negligible  force, 
and  wherever,  as  in  Spain,  Socialism  is  weak, 
Anarchism  prevails."  ^ 

To  the  extreme  Socialist,  however,  since  the  state 
is  an  institution  growing  out  of  economic  conditions 
and  destined  to  change  with  them,  the  present  state 
is  only  the  summit  of  the  capitalist  hierarchy,  the 
sponsor  of  bourgeois  property  rights.  In  Socialist 
writings,  from  Marx  to  Debs,  we  find  references  to 
the  state  as  the  instrument  of  the  subjection  of  the 
working  class.^  Not  only  in  theory  but  in  concrete 
instances  does  the  Socialist  assume  a  critical  attitude 
toward  the  present  government.  Discrimination  on 
the  part  of  the  courts,  recourse  to  the  police  in  in- 
dustrial disputes,  and  connivance  of  the  state  with 
capitalist  interests,  are  so  frequently  brought  forward 
as  evidence  of  the  bourgeois  character  of  our  govern- 
ment that  they  form  the  staple  subject  matter  of  the 
Socialist  press.  In  the  exposure  and  denunciation  of 
political  corruption  American  Socialists  play  an  ac- 
tive part;  but  they  ridicule  the  civic  reformer  who 
believes  that  he  can  stamp  out  this  evil  in  existing 
society."  The  bourgeois  state,  reason  the  Socialists, 
is  hopeless,  as  founded  upon  exploitation,  and  neither 
the  punishment  of  grafters  nor  the  election  of  good 
men  to  office  can  avail,  unless  we  first  destroy  the 
cause  of  the  corruption,  the  capitalist  system. 

"  What  is  it  that  causes  a  legislator  to  take  a 
bribe?"  asks  Mr.  Work.  "The  private  business 
interests  of  those  who  bribe  him.   .  .  .  Graft  is  a 

1  The  Socialists,  p.  125.       '  Debs,  Unionism  and  Socialism,  p.  3. 
'  N.  Y.  Call,  April  13. 


154  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

product  of  the  present  environment.  Socialism  will 
provide  an  environment  in  which  graft  cannot  live."  ^ 

Since  the  tendency  of  the  proletarian  Socialist  is  to 
view  the  capitalist  state  as  the  instrument  of  the  op- 
pressing classes,  he  transfers  to  a  large  extent  the 
loyalty  formerly  existing  as  patriotism  to  the  new 
ideal  of  working-class  solidarity  as  shown  in  the 
international  movement.  The  American  parties  are 
integral  parts  of  international  Socialism,  being 
sharply  divided  from  the  Nationalist  agitation  of 
Bellamy  some  years  ago.  Believing  that  wars  are 
mere  devices  of  the  bourgeoisie  for  the  control  of 
foreign  markets  and  that  the  two  opposing  classes  of 
capitalist  and  proletariat  are  superior  to  boundaries 
of  land  and  race,  they  repeat  very  literally  the  cry  of 
the  Communist  Manifesto,  —  "  Workingmen  of  all 
countries,  unite  I  "  ^  The  patriotic  appeals  so  char- 
acteristic of  the  older  parties  are  seldom  heard 
among  the  Socialists,  and  an  audience  ready  to  break 
into  enthusiasm  at  a  reference  to  internationalism 
or  the  solidarity  of  labor  will  remain  indifferent 
through  the  rhetorical  allusions  to  home  and  country 
of  the  old-fashioned  campaign  orator. 

To  quote  the  National  Platform,  — "  In  the 
struggle  for  freedom  the  interests  of  all  modern 
workers  are  identical.  The  struggle  is  not  only  na- 
tional, but  international.  It  embraces  the  world  and 
will  be  carried  to  ultimate  victory  by  the  united 
workers  of  the  world."  ^ 

As  internationalists,  the  American  Socialists  are 
distinctly  opposed  to  war,  ascribing  this  opposition, 
to  be  sure,  more  often  to  motives  of  enlightened  class- 
interest  than  to  those  of  humanitarian  ethics.  On 
»  Op.  cit.,  p.  6o-6s.  *  P.  46.  '  P.  4- 


OF   THE   PRESENT   DAY  15^ 

the  other  hand,  they  are  by  no  means  advocates  of 
non-resistance;  and,  in  so  far  as  the  issue  has  been 
definitely  met,  they  appear  to  expect  the  substitution 
of  popular  militia  for  the  standing  army.^  The 
attitude  of  American  Socialists  is  that  of  the  inter- 
national movement  in  their  advocacy  of  world  feder- 
ation, and  in  their  hostility  to  all  wars  of  expansion, 
to  the  increase  of  armaments  and  to  the  policy  of 
imperialism.^ 

To  Marx  and  Engels,  exiled  from  the  Fatherland 
in  the  popular  cause,  world-solidarity  might  well 
express  the  belief  that  "  the  workingmen  have  no 
country."  To  the  present-day  American  Socialist  the 
international  ideal  is  frequently,  it  is  true,  coupled 
with  a  fierce  criticism  of  national  injustice  to  the 
proletarian;  but  more  often  it  is  hailed,  as  by  Hunter 
and  Thompson,  as  the  fulfilment  of  the  hope  of  the 
early  Christians,  or,  as  by  Spargo  and  Work,  as  the 
culmination  of  true  patriotism.^ 

"  The  red  flag  signifies,"  in  the  words  of  the  latter, 
"  that  all  men  are  brothers.  ...  It  is  the  interna- 
tional banner  of  the  working-class.  It  has  been  the 
banner  of  the  working-class  for  thousands  of  years. 
In  the  struggle  for  liberty,  myriads  of  heroic  work- 
ingmen have  fought  and  died  beneath  its  folds.  Is 
it  any  wonder  we  love  it?  Old  Glory  is  a  national 
banner.  I  do  not  know  of  any  valid  reason  why  a 
Socialist  should  not  appreciate  those  who  fought  the 
battles  of  their  generations,  the  battles  which  had  to 
be  fought  in  the  evolution  of  the  race  toward  Social- 

*  See  Speech  of  Victor  Berger,  N.  Y.  Call,  April  12,  1910, 
»  Kautsky,  N.  Y.  Call,  May  16,  1910. 

'  Hunter,  Soc.  at  Work,  p.  295;  Thompson,  op.  cit.,  p.  80;  Spargo, 
The  Socialists,  Appendix,  p.  144, 


156  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

ism.  For  my  part,  I  do  appreciate  them,  and  I  love 
the  banner  they  fought  under,  the  stars  and  stripes. 
Capitalism  is  trailing  the  flag  in  the  dust.  Socialism 
will  rescue  it."  ^ 

To  the  early  Marxians  the  bourgeois  government, 
as  represented  by  the  German  militarism,  was  the 
typical  state,  and,  as  existing  only  for  purposes  of 
oppression,  could,  after  the  social  revolution,  have 
no  excuse  for  being.  This  point  of  view  is  expressed 
in  the  oft-quoted  passage  from  Engels,  in  which  he 
explains  that,  as  soon  as  the  class  struggle  and  the 
capitalist  anarchy  of  production  are  abolished,  there 
will  be  nothing  more  to  repress;  the  government  of 
persons  will  be  succeeded  by  the  administration  of 
things,  and  the  last  independent  act  of  the  state  will 
be  the  first  in  which  it  appears  as  representing  the 
whole  of  society,  the  seizure  of  the  instruments  of 
production  in  the  name  of  the  people.^ 

Such  a  narrow  conception  of  the  state,  however, 
forms  no  essential  part  of  modern  Socialist  doctrine 
in  either  Europe  or  America.  As  early  as  1875 
Liebknecht  did  not  hesitate  to  use  freely  the  expres- 
sion "  the  socialistic  state,"  and  defines  social  democ- 
racy as  "  the  just,  wise,  dignifying  arrangement  of 
state  and  society."  ^ 

Hillquit  analyzes  the  conception  of  the  state  indi- 
cated by  such  passages  as  that  of  Engels,  and,  after 
comparing  it  with  various  accepted  definitions,  con- 
cludes that  in  substance  the  Socialist  definition  of  the 
state  as  an  instrument  of  exploitation  by  the  ruling 
classes  is  correct. 

'  Op.  cit.,  p.  133. 

*  Socialism,  Utopian  and  Scientific,  p.  'jS-77. 

*  Liebknecht,  Socialism,  etc.,  p.  4,  16. 


OF   THE   PRESENT    DAY  157 

He  goes  on  to  explain,  however,  that  the  ruling 
classes  are  subject  to  change,  and  that  the  center  of 
power  is  now  gradually  shifting  from  the  capitalists 
to  the  people  at  large,  with  the  result  that  the  state 
is  becoming  an  instrument  less  of  exploitation  than 
of  possible  social  and  economic  reform.  When  the 
social  revolution  is  completed,  the  state  will  represent 
society  as  a  whole  rather  than  any  particular  class, 
and  will  still  exist,  though  adapted  to  entirely  new 
uses.^ 

"  The  socialist  society  as  conceived  by  modern 
Socialists  differs,  of  course,  very  radically  from  the 
modern  state  in  form  and  substance.  It  is  not  a  class 
state,  it  does  not  serve  any  part  of  the  population 
and  does  not  rule  any  other  part  of  the  population; 
it  represents  the  interests  of  the  entire  community, 
and  it  is  for  the  benefit  of  the  entire  community  that 
it  levies  taxes  and  makes  and  enforces  laws.  It  is 
not  the  slaveholding  state,  nor  the  feudal  state,  nor 
the  state  of  the  bourgeoisie,  —  it  is  a  socialist  state, 
—  but  a  state  nevertheless,  and  since  little  or  nothing 
can  be  gained  by  inventing  a  new  term,  we  shall  here- 
after designate  the  proposed  organized  society  as  the 
Socialist  State."  2 

A  similar  view  of  the  adaptation  of  government 
to  serve  a  Socialist  society  is  expressed  in  the  Prin- 
ciples of  the  Socialist  Labor  Party,^  and  in  the  Plat- 
form of  the  Socialist  Party.* 

The  revolutionists  of  the  Socialist  Party,  on  the 
other  hand,  still  cling  literally  to  the  conception  of 

1  Cf.  Liebknecht,  Socialism,  etc.,  p.  8. 

'  Hillquit,  op.  cit.,  p.  lOO. 

}  Principles,  p.  3.  *  S.  P.  Platform,  p.  5. 


158  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

the  state  as  held  by  Engels  and  denounce  as  unscien- 
tific the  term  "  Socialist  State."  ^  Emphasizing  as 
they  do  the  industrial  rather  than  the  political  char- 
acter of  the  proletarian  movement,  they  oppose  as 
tinged  with  State  Socialism  all  immediate  demands  of 
an  economic  nature,  maintaining  that,  under  the  pres- 
ent state,  the  workers  can  gain  economic  advan- 
tages only  by  industrial  weapons,  and  that  they 
should  therefore  devote  their  political  energies  solely 
to  such  measures  as  will  bring  the  state  to  an  end 
under  the  control  of  the  proletariat. 

"  Let  us  examine,"  says  Liebknecht,  *'  the  state 
and  society  as  they  are.  All  power  and  means  of  life 
are  to  be  found  in  the  hands  of  a  small  minority,  and 
this  minority  naturally  use  their  power  to  secure  and 
maintain  that  monopoly  of  all  advantages  which 
domination  in  state  and  society  gives,  and  to  prevent 
the  subject  majority  obtaining  political  and  social 
rights.  ...  It  follows  therefrom  that  the  interests 
of  the  subject  people  demand  the  transformation  of 
the  state  from  its  foundation,  according  to  their  in- 
terest. It  must  cease  to  be  the  possession  of  a  few 
persons  of  position  and  class  and  must  become  the 
possession  of  citizens  with  full  and  equal  rights,  of 
whom  no  one  rules  over  the  other,  and  none  will  be 
ruled  by  another."  ^ 

The  achievement  of  a  pure  political  democracy  is 
accordingly  the  aim  of  the  Socialist  parties  as  dis- 
tinguished from  the  State  Socialists,  and  is,  more- 
over, the  point  upon  which  American  Socialists  of  all 
shades  agree  both  as  to  ultimate  and  immediate  pro- 
gram.   While  the  Socialists  are  not  alone  in  agitat- 

}  N.  Y.  Call,  April  I2,  1910  *  Liebknecht,  Socialism,  p.  7-8. 


OF   THE   PRESENT   DAY  159 

ing  for  such  measures  as  tend  toward  a  pure  democ- 
racy, they  bring  to  this  advocacy  an  intensity  which 
marks  not  so  much  the  reformer  as  the  revolutionist.^ 
The  detailed  steps  of  the  political  reconstruction  are 
outlined  in  the  following  chapter  as  a  part  of  the  im- 
mediate program  of  Socialism.  They  comprise  in 
America,  as  everywhere,  unrestricted  and  equal  suf- 
frage for  men  and  women,  the  initiative  and  referen- 
dum, proportional  representation,  the  right  of  recall, 
and  the  abolition  of  the  upper  parliamentary  house. 
In  view  of  the  special  conditions  prevailing  in  this 
country  it  is  advocated  also  that  the  power  of  the 
Supreme  Court  to  pass  upon  legislation  be  abolished, 
that  the  Constitution  be  made  amendable  by  majority 
vote,  that  all  judges  be  elected  for  short  terms,  and 
that  the  power  to  issue  injunctions  be  curbed. 

It  is  realized  by  thinking  Socialists,  on  the  other 
hand,  that  all  that  democracy  can  do  is  to  give  the 
people  power  over  their  own  affairs,  and  that  a  venal 
or  careless  nation  under  Socialism,  as  under  capital- 
ism, cannot  hope  for  freedom. 

"  There  is  no  such  thing,"  writes  Spargo  in  the 
revised  edition  of  Socialism,  "  as  an  automatic  de- 
mocracy, .  .  .  eternal  vigilance  will  be  the  price 
of  liberty  under  Socialism  as  it  has  ever  been.  There 
can  be  no  other  safeguard  against  the  usurpation  of 
power  than  the  popular  will  and  conscience  ever  alert 
upon  the  watch  tower."  ^ 

The  political  democracy  must  rest  permanently 
upon  the  social  democracy;  and  Socialists  base  their 
ideal  of  the  latter  upon  the  principle  of  personal 
freedom.      Spargo    expects    social    authority   to    be 

^  Spargo,  Socialism,  etc.,  p.  215.  *  Ibid.,  Rev.,  p.  290. 


i6o  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

reduced  to  the  minimum  necessary  to  preserve  this 
freedom  to  all  individuals;  and  Socialists  often  ex- 
press the  hope  that  after  a  few  generations  the  whole 
body  of  criminal  laws  may  be  repealed,  leaving  the 
state  nothing  to  do  but  to  regulate  industry.^ 

In  contrast  to  the  bourgeois  state,  which  is  obliged 
to  base  its  control  upon  the  coercion  of  the  individ- 
ual, the  Socialist  democracy  is  expected  to  reach  its 
full  development  only  by  the  free  interaction  of  un- 
fettered judgments.  Among  the  personal  rights 
which  must  accordingly  be  kept  inviolate,  according 
to  the  Socialists,  most  Important  are  those  relating 
to  speech,  opinion  on  religious  matters,  assemblage, 
and  the  press.  American  Socialists  are  always  loud 
in  their  demands  for  individual  liberty  in  these  re- 
spects, joining  forces  in  protests  and  passive  resist- 
ance with  the  industrial  unionists  in  Spokane,  the 
anti-clericals  in  Spain,  and  the  revolutionists  in 
Mexico.- 

Since  freedom  in  religious  belief  is  a  personal  right 
which  the  Socialists  maintain  as  essential  to  democ- 
racy, the  notion  that  Socialism  is  an  enemy  to  religion 
appears  at  first  glance  absurd.  The  popular  anti- 
Socialist  articles,  however,  notably  Theodore  Roose- 
velt's series  in  The  Outlook  of  1909,  base  their  at- 
tack largely  upon  the  charge  of  hostility  to  the  insti- 
tutions of  religion  and  the  family,  and  it  is  therefore 
important  that  this  charge  be  fully  analyzed. 

As  has  been  seen,  the  economic  interpretation  of 
history  dominates  the  Socialist  philosophy,  and  no 
institution  is  therefore  held  permanently  sacred;  re- 
ligion, the  state,  and  the  present  form  of  the  family 

*  Socialism,  Rev.,  p.  290;  Work,  op.  cit.,  p.  107. 
»  Call,  Nov.  28, 1909;  Call,  Jan.  16, 1910;  Mother  Jones,  Call,  April  13, 
1910. 


OF  THE   PRESENT   DAY  i6r 

are  outgrowths  of  the  bourgeois  system,  and  as  such 
are  as  subject  to  change  as  were  the  corresponding 
institutions  at  the  close  of  the  classical  period.^  In 
its  external  forms,  at  any  rate,  religion  is  allowed  by 
the  Socialist  no  exemption  from  criticism.  The  state 
churches  of  Europe,  in  fact,  being  openly  allied  with 
the  bourgeois  governments,  are  to  be  counted  among 
the  enemies  of  the  proletariat. 

Furthermore,  in  the  so-called  "  conflict  between 
science  and  religion  "  in  the  nineteenth  century.  So- 
cialists have  played  their  part,  the  early  Marxians, 
like  most  of  the  first  generation  of  ev^olutionists, 
being  agressive  agnostics,  or  even  atheists. 

There  have  been  many  modifications  in  religious 
thought,  however,  since  the  days  of  Darwin,  and  it  is 
no  longer  necessary  to  choose  between  science  and  the 
church,  or  between  radicalism  and  religion.  A  large 
section  of  American  Socialists,  comprising  chiefly  the 
educated  among  the  native  elements,  are  coming  into 
more  and  more  friendly  terms  with  the  more  liberal 
of  the  churches,  while  the  Christian  Socialists,  until 
recently  unconnected  with  the  political  movement,  are 
now  committed  to  the  Socialist  Party  without  re- 
serve.- These  claim  that  only  in  Socialism  can  the 
teachings  of  pure  Christianity  be  realized,  and  are 
doing  much  to  win  over  politically  those  whose  ethi- 
cal principles  are  already  opposed  to  the  competitive 
system. 

It  was  in  view  of  the  various  misunderstandings 
regarding  the  attitude  of  the  Socialists  toward  reli- 
gion and  the  church  that  the  Socialist  Party  inserted 
in  their  platform  of  1908  the  following  statement:  — • 

1  La  Monte,  op.  cit.,  p.  98. 

«  The  Christian  Socialist,  June  15,  1907. 


1 62  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

"  The  Socialist  Party  is  primarily  an  economic  and 
political  movement.  It  is  not  concerned  with  matters 
of  religious  belief."  ^ 

While  the  spokesmen  of  Socialism  in  America 
affirm  with  one  accord  this  declaration  of  neutrality 
toward  religion,  certain  of  these,  including  A.  M. 
Lewis  and  George  Allan  England,  follow  Bebel  and 
Ferri  in  basing  their  neutrality  upon  the  confidence 
that  religious  beliefs  are  destined  to  perish  with  the 
extension  of  scientific  education.  Spargo,  however, 
represents  the  opinion  of  most  American  Socialists 
when  he  tells  us  that  all  grades  of  believers  or  unbe- 
lievers may  accept  the  Socialist  theories  without 
doing  violence  to  their  own  ideas.^ 

There  is  growing  in  the  Socialist  Party,  as  in  other 
circles,  a  disposition  to  distinguish  religion  from  its 
external  and  established  forms,  and  to  let  each  stand 
on  its  own  merits  as  a  social  force  to  be  judged  by  its 
fruits  in  human  welfare. 

"  If  the  church  is  an  organ  of  class  rule,"  writes 
A.  M.  Simons,  "  and  is  dependent  upon  class  distinc- 
tions for  its  existence,  then  it  will  be  injured.  If  it 
is  based  upon  a  system  of  ethical  practice  and  doc- 
trines then  I  can  see  no  reason  why  it  should  be  in- 
jured, —  providing  those  doctrines  stand  the  test 
of  reason." 

Among  the  foreign-born  Socialists  from  countries 
dominated  by  a  state  church,  and  among  the  working- 
class  rank  and  file  of  the  American  membership,  there 
is  still  considerable  hostility  to  the  church  and  a 
strong  tendency  to  atheism.    This  state  of  affairs  is 

»  p.  4.  «  The  Socialists,  p.  128. 


OF   THE   PRESENT   DAY  163 

doubtless  owing  in  part  to  a  neglect  of  the  working- 
class  by  the  Protestant  churches.  It  must  be  remem- 
bered also  that  liberality  usually  requires  wide  culture 
for  a  basis,  and  that  the  self-educated  worker  whose 
creed  has  come  into  collision  with  the  materialistic 
conception  of  Marx  is  less  likely  to  make  a  synthesis 
of  both  than  to  substitute  the  dogmas  of  scientific 
socialism  for  those  of  revelation. 

An  indication  that  this  belligerent  irreligion  is  due 
less  to  antagonism  to  Christianity  than  to  rebellion 
against  authorized  theology  is  shown  in  the  reverence 
paid  by  most  Socialists  to  the  historical  Jesus,  viewed 
often  as  a  fellow-revolutionist  condemned  by  the  re- 
spectability of  his  day. 

Says  an  avowed  materialist,  Ernest  Untermann:  — 

"  Jesus  had  transformed  the  Jewish  god  of  hate 
into  a  god  of  love  and  a  prince  of  peace.  The  church 
of  the  possessing  Christians  molded  him  into  a  hide- 
ous monstrosity,  a  god  of  love  who  is  a  god  of  hate, 
and  a  prince  of  peace  who  brings  a  sword.  And  they 
lived  up  to  this  monstrosity  of  their  own  creation  and 
flew  at  one  another's  throats  immediately  after  they 
had  betrayed  their  proletarian  comrades  and  de- 
stroyed the  life's  work  of  Jesus. 

"  But  the  modern  proletarian  remembers  the  cross 
on  Golgotha."  ^ 

The  family,  like  the  church,  is  frequently  charged 
with  being  an  object  of  Socialist  attack,  and  in  this 
case  also  we  have  the  reiteration  of  neutrality  by  the 
Socialists  themselves.  The  foundation  for  the  charge 
exists  chiefly  in  the  before  mentioned  attitude  of 
Marxians  toward  present  institutions,  and  in  their 

*  Science  and  Rev.,  p.  33,  seq. 


1 64  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

insistence  upon  the  equal  rights  of  women  as  an  essen- 
tial of  social  democracy. 

"  The  Socialist  philosophy,"  says  A.  H.  Floaten, 
of  the  National  Executive  Committee  for  1909,  "  has 
no  attitude  toward  the  institution  of  the  family,  ex- 
cept that  this  institution  like  all  other  forms  of  insti- 
tutions has  changed  and  will  change  according  to  the 
changes  of  conditions  and  environment."  Arthur 
Morrow  Lewis  makes  the  statement  that  any  funda- 
mental change  in  economic  relations  cannot  fail  to 
affect  the  family,  among  other  social  institutions,  and 
La  Monte  believes  that  the  family  of  the  future, 
while  probably  monogamous,  will  not  be  compelled 
to  assume  this  form.^ 

As  we  have  it  at  present,  according  to  the  Social- 
ists, the  family  rests  upon  a  foundation  of  property 
rights,  veiled  under  some  of  the  outworn  forms  of 
the  patriarchate.  With  the  minimizing  of  inherited 
estates  and  the  economic  independence  of  women, 
with  full  civil  and  political  rights  accorded  to  the 
latter  and  the  eventual  responsibility  of  society  for 
the  maintenance  of  children,  both  the  theory  of  the 
patriarchal  and  the  actuality  of  the  property  family 
would  disappear.  Women  would  be  compelled 
neither  to  marry  for  a  home  nor  to  remain  in  sub- 
jection to  a  distasteful  marriage;  and,  though  few 
Americans  look  for  the  revolution  foretold  in  Bebel's 
fVoman  under  Socialism^  yet  a  decided  change  in  the 
position  of  the  sex  would  under  these  circumstances 
be  inevitable.^ 

Furthermore,  Socialists  are  given  to  pointing  out 
certain  evils  in  the  present  institution  of  the  family: 
—  that  strict  monogamy  is  not  universal;  that  many 

*  La  Monte,  op.  cit.,  p,  99  *  Op.  cit.,  p.  343,  seq. 


OF   THE   PRESENT   DAY  165 

women  are  kept  in  immorality  directly  or  indirectly 
for  economic  reasons;  and  that  divorce,  itself  less 
an  evil  than  a  danger  signal,  is  alarmingly  prevalent 
in  America.  They  are  not  alone  in  observing  these 
wrongs,  but,  as  their  philosophy  absolves  them  from 
reverence  for  institutions  as  such,  they  are  found  in 
large  numbers  among  those  who  cry  out  for  a  frank 
discussion  and  correction  of  the  abuses  of  the  family. 
The  emphasis  of  Socialists  upon  personal  liberty 
causes  at  times  even  a  real  hostility  to  marriage  in 
its  legal  aspects. 

"  Other  Socialists,"  writes  Spargo,  "  would  include 
in  the  category  of  private  acts  outside  the  sphere  of 
law  the  union  of  the  sexes.  They  would  do  away 
with  legal  intervention  in  marriage  and  make  it  ex- 
clusively a  private  concern.  On  the  other  hand, 
again,  many  Socialists,  probably  an  overwhelming 
majority,  would  object.  They  would  insist  that  the 
state  must,  in  the  interest  of  the  children  and  for  its 
own  self-preservation,  assume  certain  responsibilities 
for,  and  exercise  a  certain  control  over  all  marriages. 
While  believing  that  under  Socialism  marriage  would 
no  longer  be  subject  to  economic  motives  —  matri- 
monial markets  for  titles  and  fortunes  no  longer  ex- 
isting —  and  that  the  maximum  of  personal  freedom 
together  with  the  minimum  of  social  authority  would 
be  possible  in  the  union  of  the  sexes,  they  would  still 
insist  upon  the  necessity  of  that  minimum  of  legal 
control."  * 

The  Communist  Manifesto^  followed  by  many 
other  Socialist  utterances,  has  incurred  the  suspicion 
of  moralists  by  accusing  in  unmeasured  terms  the 

*  Spargo,  Socialism,  p.  218-219. 


i66  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

"  bourgeois  "  family  and  offering  no  substitute  in  its 
place.  A  few  writers,  notably  Bebel  and  Bax,  with 
a  negligible  and  indefinite  following  in  this  country, 
anticipate  frankly  a  new  type  of  family,  ranging  from 
trial  marriage  to  a  relation  more  or  less  approaching 
free  love.^  It  is  the  unofficial  writings  of  these  radi- 
cals, together  with  the  generally  critical  attitude  of 
Socialists  toward  the  abuses  of  the  family,  that  have 
supplied  material  for  the  charges  before  mentioned. 

While  the  Socialist  Party  remains  officially  neutral 
as  to  the  form  of  the  family,  there  is  an  abundance 
of  statements  by  such  various  leaders  as  Spargo,  Hill- 
quit,  Work,  Simons,  Berger,  Goebel,  and  De  Leon, 
maintaining  that  Socialism  will  make  the  perma- 
nently monogamic  relation  possible  for  the  first  time 
in  history.2 

Victor  Berger  is  t)^ical  in  his  declaration:  — 

"  The  story  that  Socialism  will  destroy  the  family 
is  one  of  the  lies  brought  up  against  every  reform 
movement.  ...  It  is  capitalism  which  destroys  the 
family  by  compelling  the  fathers  and  the  mothers  to 
go  to  the  factory,  and  by  forcing  young  children  into 
the  workshop.  Socialism  will  restore  the  family; 
and  by  making  the  women  economically  independent, 
it  will  also  bring  about  the  much  needed  physical  and 
moral  regeneration  of  our  civilized  nations." 

Popular  education  must,  in  the  last  resort,  be  the 
reliance  of  either  a  Socialist  or  a  capitalist  democracy. 
While  the  public  schools  are  indeed  bringing  definite 
results  in  the  eradication  of  illiteracy,  an  indication 

'  Bebel,  op.  cit.,  p.  345-347;  Bax,  Religion  of  Socialism,  p.  145;  Out- 
looks from  the  New  Standpoint,  p.  15,  seq. 

*  See  De  Leon,  preface  of  Bebel's  Woman  under  Socialism,  p.  vi. 


OF   THE   PRESENT    DAY  167 

of  the  work  still  untouched  is  afforded  by  the  fact 
that  economics,  a  requisite  for  all  in  a  Socialist  state, 
is  at  present  taught  in  but  two  of  the  high  schools 
of  Manhattan. 

The  Socialist  parties,  with  their  motto,  "  Agitate, 
educate,  organize,"  claim  to  be  themselves  an  impor- 
tant factor  in  the  education  of  the  proletariat  toward 
an  efficient  democracy.  Organized  upon  purely  dem- 
ocratic lines,  with  the  constant  use  of  the  referendum, 
they  are  helping  the  labor  unions  to  train  the  workers, 
both  native  and  foreign-born,  in  a  knowledge  of  eco- 
nomic tendencies,  a  capacity  for  reasoned  judgment, 
and  a  familiarity  with  the  details  of  politics.^  Parti- 
san this  education  undoubtedly  is,  but  it  supplies 
almost  the  only  instruction  on  economic  or  civic  sub- 
jects that  is  afforded  the  working-class  voter. 

That  there  should  be  any  question  as  to  the  Social- 
ist attitude  toward  the  higher  forms  of  culture  seems 
surprising  when  we  consider  that  such  culture  apostles 
as  William  Morris  and  Oscar  Wilde  embraced  this 
philosophy  as  the  salvation  of  the  world.^  There 
is  hardly  a  Socialist  author  who  does  not  rejoice  in 
the  hope  of  a  golden  age  for  science  and  art,  pointing 
to  the  achievements  of  the  Athenian  democracy,  im- 
perfect experiment  though  it  was,  to  show  the  possi- 
bilities of  a  society  where  beauty  is  provided  for 
all  and  genius  is  freed  from  the  need  of  private 
patronage,^ 

In  the  educational  work  previously  mentioned  the 
Socialist  Party  is,  on  the  whole,  true  to  this  ideal. 
Among  the  subjects  discussed  in  the  workingmen's 
forums  during  a  recent  winter  were  "  The  Theater 

^  See  Sombart,  p.  124,  op.  cit. 
,    *  Oscar  Wilde,  op.  cit.,  p.  32.  '  Hillquit,  op.  cit.,  p.  127. 


1 68  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

in  Human  Civilization,"  "  The  Modern  School,"  and 
"  Social  Ideals  of  American  Poets,"  and  The  Sunday 
Call  sets  before  the  workers  such  essays  as  "  Prag- 
matism as  it  Seems  to  Me,"  "  Social  Classes  at  the 
Time  of  the  French  Revolution,"  and  Veblen's  "  De- 
velopment of  the  Scientific  Spirit."  ^  A  strong  im- 
pression is  made  upon  the  newcomer  in  the  party  by 
the  enthusiasm  of  the  working-class  members  for  the 
opera  and  drama  rather  than  the  vaudeville,  for 
sociology  in  the  broad  sense,  and  for  such  radical 
fiction  writers  as  Ibsen  and  Tolstoi. 

There  is  a  contrary  force,  however,  influejitial 
among  a  minority  of  American  Socialists.  With 
those  who  cling  most  literally  to  the  doctrines  of  eco- 
nomic materialism  and  the  class  struggle,  there  exists 
great  emphasis  upon  '*  class-consciousness,"  the  real- 
ization of  and  loyalty  to  a  man's  own  social  class. 
An  extreme  form  of  class-consciousness  leads  at 
times  to  that  laudation  of  the  manual  laborer  as  such 
which  sometimes  appears  in  American  propaganda. 
In  the  course  of  the  controversy  before  alluded  to 
regarding  the  proletarians  and  the  "  intellectuals," 
a  correspondent  of  The  Call  contributed  the  follow- 
ing sally :  — 

*'  I  challenge  you  to  sit  down  at  the  bench  and 
make  as  good  a  shoe  as  I  make,  handle  a  machine  as 
I  do;  yes,  even  sweep  the  street  as  I  do.  Surely,  in 
my  work  I  possess  more  intellectuality  than  you  do 
and  even  than  Darwin  or  Marx  did.  Why  do  you 
lay  so  much  stress  and  dignity  on  your  kind  of  intel- 
lect and  look  down  on  mine?  What  would  your 
great  intellectuality  amount  to  without  that  of  the 
baker?  "2 

'  See  N.  Y.  Call.'Dpc.  12,  1909,  Jan.  16,  1910,  Feb.  13,  T910. 
*  Ibid.,  Dec.  15,  1909. 


OF  THE   PRESENT   DAY  169 

Even  a  mental  worker  such  as  Untermann  speaks 
of  a  "  motley  crowd  of  Bohemian  intellectuals,  who 
flirt  with  the  revolution,  but  eschew  all  contact  with 
its  proletarian  elements  for  fear  of  rubbing  the  bloom 
off  their  refined  sensibilities  ";  and  the  term  "  parlor 
Socialist,"  applied  to  these  radicals  by  the  conserva- 
tive press,  is  sometimes  derisively  echoed  among 
their  own  associates.^ 

In  so  far  as  this  ultra-proletarian  attitude  on  the 
part  of  certain  Socialists  suggests  that  in  the  popular 
cause  brawn  is  set  above  brain,  and  that  in  the  Social- 
ist commonwealth  intellectual  pursuits  will  be  re- 
garded as  honorable  diversions  rather  than  produc- 
tive labor,  it  is  of  serious  significance  to  the  American 
parties. 

In  summing  up  this  chapter,  we  find  that  the  pro- 
gram of  American  Socialism  is  much  more  definite  in 
its  political  and  social  than  in, its  economic  aspects. 
Based  on  the  conception  of  complete  political  and 
social  democracy  involved  in  the  permanent  conquest 
of  power  by  the  proletariat,  it  has  been  expanded  by 
modern  Marxians  into  the  ideal  of  a  Socialist  society 
or  state  which  shall  differ  radically  from  all  previous 
states,  in  that  it  will  exist  not  for  oppression  but  for 
mutual  aid,  and  will  be  no  longer  an  isolated  and 
warring  nation,  but  a  member  of  the  world's  federa- 
tion of  workers.  Politically  it  will  involve  all  meas- 
ures that  tend  to  give  the  control  of  government  into 
the  hands  of  the  population  as  a  whole,  regardless  of 
sex  or  class.  Socially  it  will  signify  the  greatest  pos- 
sible measure  of  personal  freedom  in  all  matters  of 
individual  concern.  Toward  the  social  establish- 
ments of  the  church  and  the  family  Socialism  remains 

*  Untermann,  Marxian  Economics,  p.  27. 


170  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

neutral,  but,  while  repudiating  as  unofficial  all  attacks 
upon  either  by  its  own  adherents,  it  rejects  also  all 
claim  to  inviolability  on  the  part  of  institutions  that 
are  the  outgrowth  of  constantly  evolving  economic 
conditions.  While  popular  education,  including  the 
higher  forms  of  culture,  is  demanded  as  the  founda- 
tion of  the  social  democracy,  and  while  the  Socialist 
parties  declare  themselves  to  be  an  efficient  factor  in 
such  education,  the  exaltation  of  the  manual  laborer 
by  certain  Socialists  at  the  expense  of  the  so-called 
"  intellectual  "  is  a  tendency  which  works  to  some 
extent  against  this  general  ideal. 

To  the  revolutionist  the  political  and  social  pro- 
gram constitutes  the  essence  of  the  movement  as  far 
as  the  Socialist  parties  are  concerned,  to  the  construc- 
tivist  the  economic  program;  to  both  the  triumph  of 
Socialism  will  be  complete  only  when  the  political, 
social,  and  industrial  democracy  has  been  perma- 
nently established. 


CHAPTER  XII 

THE  IMMEDIATE   PROGRAM   OF  AMERICAN 
SOCIALISM 

It  has  already  been  noticed  that  the  leaders  of 
Marxian  Socialism  have  hitherto  spent  the  greater 
part  of  their  energies  first  on  the  analysis  of  present 
conditions  and  second  on  the  immediate  or  transi- 
tional demands  of  present  legislation,  leaving  largely 
to  the  Utopians  the  details  of  the  ultimate  industrial 
structure.  This  emphasis  is  justifiable  from  the  point 
of  view  of  scientific  Socialism,  in  that,  while  the  eco- 
nomic forces  that  are  to  produce  the  ultimate  details 
have  not  yet  been  perfected,  the  immediate  demands 
are  based  upon  social  relations  that  are  the  direct 
consequence  of  present  industrial  conditions. 

The  Communist  Manifesto  laid  stress  on  imme- 
diate demands,  but  American  Socialism  is  by  no 
means  unanimous  in  advocating  all  that  appear  in 
the  program.^  In  the  same  way  that  the  German 
Socialists  formerly  elected  representatives  merely  for 
purposes  of  protest,  so  the  more  "  revolutionary  " 
of  the  American  party  still  advise  the  use  of  the 
franchise  for  only  two  purposes.  The  first  of  these 
is  the  frightening  of  the  older  parties  into  themselves 
passing  the  legislation  demanded  by  the  workers,  a 
policy  which  draws  strength  from  the  concessions  to 

»  P.  32-33* 


172  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

Socialism  made  by  the  German  government  from 
time  to  time  since  the  days  of  Bismarck;  ^  the  second 
is  the  gaining  for  the  workers  of  full  political  liberty 
and  of  complete  freedom  in  industrial  organizations. 
All  attempts  at  economic  legislation  are  to  be  post- 
poned until  a  Socialist  majority  shall  have  given 
the  proletariat  complete  control.  The  platform  of 
the  Socialist  Labor  Party  thus  contains  no  immediate 
demands,  and  in  the  Socialist  Party  a  member  of 
the  National  Committee  has  declared:  "We  can 
shove  the  whole  reform  sentiment  out  of  the  party 
and  be  the  better  for  it."  ^  Nevertheless,  the  fact 
of  the  inclusion  of  such  demands  in  the  platform 
of  1908  shows  that  the  majority  are  of  the  opinion  of 
Thompson :  — 

"  Unless  constructive  methods  are  adopted  by 
the  Socialist  Party  as  a  national  organization,  the 
party  will  become  a  complete  failure.  The  time 
has  come  when  our  party  must  go  forward  or  it 
will  surely  go  backwardy  ^ 

Almost  without  exception  the  immediate  demands 
of  American  Socialism  are  either  obvious  steps 
toward  the  ultimate  program  previously  presented 
or  measures  identical  with  those  already  advocated 
by  other  bodies  of  reformers.^  We  may  therefore 
leave  detailed  analysis  to  special  treatments  of  the 
reforms  in  question,  pausing  only  to  outline  each 
and  to  point  out  where  necessary  the  Socialist  atti- 

*  See  Hunter,  Soc.  at  Work,  p.  179,  223;  N.  Y.  Call,  May  26,  19 10, 
Editorial. 

*  Weekly  Bull.,  March  7,  1908. 

*  Ibid.,  Jan.  12,  1907. 

*  The  immediate  demands  mentioned  in  this  chapter  are  found  on 
p.  6-8  of  the  National  S.  P.  Platform  for  1908. 


OF   THE   PRESENT   DAY  173 

tude  to  other  organizations  working  for  the  same 
ends.  It  may  be  noted  In  general  that  the  Socialists, 
according  to  their  degree  of  "  revolutionism,"  main- 
tain a  decided  suspicion  of  all  reform  proposals 
emanating  from  non-Socialist  quarters.  This  sus- 
picion manifests  itself  in  expressions  ranging  from 
salutary  criticism  to  denunciations  and  impugnment 
of  motive,  the  heading  "  Capitalist  Reform  Futile," 
in  the  national  platform,  being  Illustrative  of  the 
general  Socialist  sentiment.^ 

The  demands  fall  under  three  heads,  —  measures 
tending  directly  to  improve  the  condition  of  the 
working-class,  those  aiming  toward  a  pure  democ- 
racy, and  those  that  may  form  instalments  of  the 
ultimate  commonwealth. 

First  among  these  are  the  measures  of  Industrial 
reform.  An  acceptance  of  the  doctrine  of  increas- 
ing misery  in  its  extreme  form  would  tend  to  dis- 
courage any  attempts  toward  immediate  amelioration 
on  the  score  that  only  a  desperate  proletariat  could 
be  ripe  for  revolution.  As  has  been  explained,  how- 
ever, the  extreme  interpretation  has  never  charac- 
terized Marxism,  Marx  and  Engels  declaring,  as 
far  back  as  the  Manifesto,  that  "  the  social  scum  " 
is  less  fit  to  take  part  in  the  social  revolution  than 
to  become  the  tool  of  reactionary  intrigue.^  Von 
Vollmar  expresses  the  German  policy  In  his  declara- 
tion that  the  person  who  has  sunk  below  a  certain 
standard  of  living  is  adapted  to  a  street  riot  rather 
than  to  political  effort,  and  that  therefore  a  degraded 
working  class  cannot  form  the  material  for  socialism.^ 

"  The  Socialists,"  writes  Hlllqult,  "  attach  the 
greatest  Importance  to  all  reforms  of  this  character. 

*  Nat,  Plat.,  p.  s.  '  ?•  21.         » .  Kampffmeyer,  op.  cit.,  p.  29, 


174  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

They  realize  that  the  task  of  transforming  the 
modern  capitalist  society  into  a  Socialist  common- 
wealth can  be  accomplished  only  by  the  conscious, 
systematic,  and  persevering  efforts  of  a  working 
class  physically,  mentally  and  morally  fit  for  the 
assumption  of  the  reins  of  government,  and  not  by 
a  blind  revolt  of  a  furious  and  desperate  rabble."  ^ 

The  first  industrial  demand  In  the  national  plat- 
form is  the  shortening  of  the  work-day  in  keeping 
with  the  increased  productiveness  of  machinery. 
The  New  York  Municipal  Program  narrows  this 
down  to  the  eight-hour  day  for  city  employes;  and 
the  Socialists  of  the  Wisconsin  legislature  have  suc- 
ceeded in  securing  an  eight-hour  law  for  telegra- 
phers.^ Among  the  bills  of  the  latter  for  the  session 
of  1909  are  included  one  limiting  the  hours  of  labor 
for  women  and  another  prescribing  an  average  ten- 
hour  day  for  bakers.  In  all  Socialist  agitation  much 
stress  is  laid  upon  the  progressive  shortening  of 
the  work-day,  but  the  Socialist  arguments  in  its  favor 
are  invariably  based  not  upon  the  usual  claim  of  a 
resulting  advantage  to  the  employer  in  the  improved 
quality  of  labor,  but  upon  that  of  advantage  to  the 
workingman  in  bettered  personal  conditions  and 
lessening  of  unemployment.  A  rest  period  of  not 
less  than  a  day  and  a  half  in  each  week  is  a  further 
demand  of  the  national  and  Wisconsin  programs. 

The  indefinite  national  demand  of  *'  a  more  ef- 
fective inspection  of  workshops  and  factories  "  and 
the  New  York  demand  for  union  conditions  are  sup- 

'  P.  214,  Socialism  in  Theory  and  Practice. 

*  For  these  and  similar  following  statements  the  authorities  are  the 
N.  Y.  Municipar  Program,  q.  v.,  and  Winfield  Gaylord,  The  Call,  Jan. 
16,  1910.     See  also  Thompson,  op.  cit.,  p.  49. 


OF   THE   PRESENT    DAY  175 

plemented  in  the  Wisconsin  legislative  program  by 
provisions  for  the  publication  of  labor  contracts,  for 
ventilation  of  manufacturing  establishments,  and  for 
the  laying  of  temporary  floors  at  every  story  of  new 
buildings.  Among  the  measures  passed  in  Wisconsin 
are  two  securing  respectively  guard  rails  for  dan- 
gerous machinery  and  blowers  for  carrying  off  me- 
tallic dust.^ 

While  the  national  program  calls  for  the  prohi- 
bition of  the  employment  of  children  under  16  years 
of  age,  the  Wisconsin  Socialists  have  not  yet  pre- 
sented so  drastic  a  measure.  They  have  given  special 
attention  to  the  matter  of  child  labor,  however,  and 
have  aided  materially  in  securing  such  reforms  as 
the  exclusion  of  children  under  14  from  the  handling 
of  dangerous  machinery  and  the  restriction  of  those 
under  16  to  55  hours  of  labor  per  week.^  As  indi- 
viduals, American  Socialists  frequently  cooperate  in 
the  work  of  the  National  Child  Labor  Committee. 

A  kindred  demand  of  the  national  platform  is  the 
forbidding  of  the  interstate  transportation  of  the 
products  of  child  labor,  of  convict  labor,  and  of  all 
uninspected  factories.  There  Is  prescribed  the  aboli- 
tion of  "  official  charity  "  and  the  substitution  in  its 
place  of  compulsory  insurance  against  unemployment, 
illness,  accidents,  invalidism,  old  age,  and  death, 
a  demand  which  is  followed  substantially  by  the 
New  York  program.  In  Wisconsin  the  Socialist 
legislators  have  secured  the  right  of  counties  to  pen- 
sion blind  persons  and  have  performed  vigorous  work 
in  the  committee  on  insurance  and  in  working  out  a 
careful  compensation  act.^    One  of  the  first  bills  to 

1  Thompson,  op.  cit.,  p.  46.  ;  *  Ibid.,  p.  51. 

8  Ibid.,  p.  47,  57. 


176  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

be  introduced  in  Congress  by  Victor  Berger  provides 
for  a  pension  of  four  dollars  per  week  for  workers 
sixty  years  of  age  who  have  resided  in  the  country 
for  twenty-one  years  and  received  a  salary  of  less 
than  $1000  per  year. 

A  significant  illustration  of  the  growing  tendency 
of  the  Socialist  Party  toward  definite  constructive 
work  has  recently  been  afforded  by  the  New  York 
local  organization  in  connection  with  its  participa- 
tion in  the  hearings  of  the  Wainwright  Commission 
on  workmen's  compensation.  Although  the  action 
was  directly  opposed  by  the  more  "  revolutionary  " 
members  as  asking  favors  from  the  capitalist  govern- 
ment, a  committee  was  officially  appointed  to  appear 
before  the  commission  jointly  with  a  committee  from 
the  labor  unions  of  the  city.  A  plan  was  submitted, 
modelled  to  a  great  extent  upon  the  English  acts; 
and,  as  the  bill  recommended  by  the  Wainwright 
Commission  and  passed  by  the  legislature  failed  to 
come  up  to  this  standard  and  was  afterwards  declared 
unconstitutional,  the  local  Socialist  Party  is  prepar- 
ing to  continue  the  fight  for  the  act  originally  pro- 
posed. Most  important  of  all,  the  cooperation  with 
the  labor  unions  has  proved  so  satisfactory  that  a 
permanent  joint  committee  upon  the  subject  has  been 
formed  in  which  Socialists  and  unions  are  continuing 
to  work  together  for  a  more  radical  compensation 
act. 

The  belittling  of  *'  official  charity  "  is  somev/hat 
typical  of  the  Socialist  attitude  toward  benevolent 
institutions  in  general.  While  the  doctrine  of  in- 
creasing misery  is  held  by  but  few,  yet  the  Marxist 
regards  the  attempts  of  philanthropy  as  mere  pallia- 
tives.    The  Socialist  and  the  settlement  or  charity 


OF   THE   PRESENT   DAY  177 

worker  frequently  indeed  meet  In  the  same  person, 
but  it  is  usually  the  case  that  the  work  has  led  to 
Socialism  through  discouragement  with  conditions, 
rather  than  that  Socialism  has  led  to  the  work.  A 
prominent  charity  worker  in  New  York  recently 
resigned  his  official  position  on  the  ground  that  it 
hampered  his  freedom  for  the  service  of  Socialism. 
There  is  sometimes  even  a  tendency  to  regard  the 
charitable  societies  as  the  almoners  of  capitalism 
and  thus  members  of  the  opposing  camp;  and, 
without  directly  antagonizing  the  institutions  for  the 
immediate  relief  of  poverty,  the  Socialist  usually 
turns  his  attention  rather  to  the  work  of  propaganda 
and  education,  as  to  him  more  fundamental,  if  also 
more  remote  methods  of  dealing  with  social  evils. 

The  Appeal  to  Reason  thus  characterized  the  gift 
of  the  Russell  Sage  Foundation  in  1907:  — 

"  Mrs.  Russell  Sage  has  given  ten  millions  as  a' 
fund  to  investigate  poverty  and  crime.  That  she  put 
it  in  the  possession  of  a  lot  of  professional  charity 
workers  shows  how  good  intentions  are  often  made 
the  victim  of  lack  of  knowledge.  Charity  is  a  money- 
making  profession  in  these  days  of  prosperity,  and 
the  whole  fund  will  simply  be  used  to  hold  the  system 
that  produces  poverty  so  the  job  of  spending  it  will 
last."  1 

In  Europe,  as  well  as  in  America,  Socialists  work 
as  the  direct  political  representatives  of  the  labor 
movement ;  ^  and  among  the  few  immediate  demands 
approved  by  the  revolutionist  faction  are  the  right 
of  all  classes  of  government  employes  to  strike  and 
the  legalization  of  the  primary,  secondary,  and  ter- 

*  March  30,  1907.  '  Hunter,  Socialists  at  Work,  p.  186. 


178  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

tiary  boycott.  William  E.  Walling  classes  these 
among  the  "  revolutionary  "  demands,  —  those  which 
no  capitalist  party  will  ever  steal  from  the  Socialists 
until  the  proletarian  triumph  is  at  hand.^  In  the 
United  States  it  is  the  state  or  the  local,  rather  than 
the  national  program,  that  deals  with  the  rights  of 
labor  organizations.  The  Wisconsin  legislative  pro- 
gram here  frequently  referred  to  was  formulated 
jointly  by  the  Socialist  legislators,  the  party  execu- 
tives, and  the  representatives  of  the  Wisconsin  State 
Federation  of  Labor  and  the  Milwaukee  Federated 
Trades  Council.  We  accordingly  have  the  following 
bills  upon  the  list:  restricting  the  use  of  private  de- 
tectives, giving  trades  unions  the  right  peacefully  to 
obtain  information  and  to  persuade  any  person  to 
quit  work,  allowing  two  or  more  persons  to  cooperate 
in  a  trade  dispute,  and  providing  that  no  union  shall 
be  sued  for  damages  caused  by  a  member  of  the 
same.  The  Socialists  of  Milwaukee  have  passed 
through  the  city  council  an  indirect  endorsement  of 
union  labor;  and  Mayor  Seidel  expressly  prohibited 
the  police  of  that  city  from  interference  in  a  local 
strike.  The  Socialist  member  of  the  Massachusetts 
legislature,  Mr.  Morrill,  has  been  successful  in  a  bill 
requiring  every  employer  at  whose  establishment  a 
strike  is  in  progress  to  make  the  fact  known  In  ad- 
vertising for  workmen.^ 

The  restriction  of  immigration  Is  a  demand  which, 
while  almost  always  present  in  non-Socialist  labor 
agitation,  has  thus  far  failed  to  appear  In  the 
platform  of  the  Socialist  Party,  owing  to  the  prin- 
ciple of  international  solidarity.     Discussion  has  al- 

1  Walling,  N.  Y.  Call,  Dec.  I2,  1909. 

2  N.Y.  Call,  May  31,  1910. 


OF   THE   PRESENT   DAY  179 

ready  begun,  however,  which  indicates  that  American 
Socialists  are  being  forced  into  a  position  contrary 
to  that  of  the  Marxians  in  Europe.  At  the  Stuttgart 
International  Socialist  Congress  of  1907,  Morris 
Hillquit  differed  from  the  majority  upon  the  subject 
of  immigration.  Upon  his  return  he  was  supported 
by  the  National  Executive  Committee  and  by  a  party 
referendum  in  a  resolution  against  the  immigration 
to  America  of  the  Oriental  races,  because  of  their 
tendency  to  bring  down  the  living  standard  among 
workers.  A  statement  in  the  official  Study  Course, 
however,  is  as  follows:  — 

"  The  Socialist  remedy  is  [not]  to  prevent  immi- 
gration (except  in  so  far  as  this  is  promoted  by  false 
representations  for  the  purpose  of  glutting  the  labor 
market),  but  to  promote  the  naturalization  and  as- 
similation of  immigrants."  ^ 

The  last  Congress  of  the  Socialist  Party  gave 
especial  attention  to  the  question  of  immigration. 
"  In  a  vigorous  and  prolonged  debate  Untermann, 
as  spokesman  for  the  majority  of  a  special  commit- 
tee elected  at  the  1908  convention  to  report  on  the 
subject,  argued  ably  for  the  exclusion  of  all  Oriental 
laborers;  Spargo,  as  author  of  a  minority  report, 
vigorously  opposed  the  exclusion  of  any  race  or  races 
at  this  time.  His  position  differed  from  that  taken 
by  the  Stuttgart  Congress  in  that  he  admitted  that  if 
the  workers  of  America  were  forced,  in  order  to 
protect  their  standards  of  living,  to  restrict  immigra- 
tion or  prohibit  it  altogether  they  would  be  justified 
in  doing  so.  He  denied,  however,  that  any  such 
necessity  yet  exists  or  seems  imminent,  and  empha- 

*  N.  Y.  Call,  March  7,  1910. 


II  8o  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

sized  the  contention  that  the  remedy  for  the  evils 
incidental  to  immigration  is  educational  and  organ- 
izing work  among  the  immigrant  workers.  He  de- 
clared that  exclusion  of  the  worker  would  avail 
nothing,  since  there  could  be  no  exclusion  of  the 
product  of  Oriental  or  other  foreign  labor  from  the 
world  market.  In  the  end  a  substitute  resolution, 
offered  by  Hlllquit,  affirming  in  general  the  Stuttgart 
resolution,  but  favoring  the  prohibition  of  '  mass 
importation  '  of  foreign  labor  by  the  capitalist  class, 
was   adopted." 

It  is  unnecessary  to  enlarge  further  than  has  been 
done  upon  the  generally  intimate  connection  between 
Socialism  and  organized  labor,  and  upon  the  series 
of  antagonisms  that  at  present  renders  the  American 
Federation  of  Labor  officially  hostile  to  Socialism, 
though  containing  within  itself  many  Socialists.  It 
must  be  remembered,  on  the  other  hand,  that  several 
bodies  of  organized  labor  are  avowedly  Socialist,^ 
and  that  the  relation  of  the  labor  unions  to  the 
Socialist  Party  is  now  a  live  issue  in  both  ranks. 

There  is  one  phase  of  labor  activity,  however,  to 
which  Socialists  are  in  unqualified  opposition,  — 
namely,  the  conciliatory  movement  manifested  In  the 
National  Civic  Federation.  Union  officials  who  have 
accepted  positions  with  that  body  are  either  de- 
nounced as  traitors  or  ridiculed  as  dupes,  and  its  capi- 
talist members  are  charged  with  aiming  merely  to 
render  labor  submissive  by  flattery  and  false  claims 
of  Identity  of  interest.  The  S.  P.  Official  Bulletin 
states: — 

*  According  to  Hunter,  these  unions  include  660,000  members  (N.  Y. 
Call,  June  9,  1910). 


OF   THE   PRESENT   DAY  iSr 

"  This  organization  has  definitely  entered  the  lists 
as  an  anti-Socialist  institution  and  must  henceforth  be 
classed  with  the  London  Municipal  Society  as  co- 
laborers  in  defense  of  capitalism."  ^ 

While  Socialists  recognize  workmen's  cooperatives 
as  a  part  of  their  own  class  struggle,  they  look  with 
suspicion  upon  such  partially  cooperative  schemes 
as  profit-sharing  and  the  issuance  of  stock  to  work- 
men. Even  the  philanthropic  employer  meets  only 
a  grudging  commendation,  and  such  an  Institution  as 
Nelson's  establishment  at  Le  Claire  is  viewed  as  an 
effort  to  confuse  the  issue  of  the  struggle,  and,  like 
the  Civic  Federation,  to  soothe  the  worker  into  a 
dangerous  relaxation  of  vigilance.^ 

The  political  demands  of  Socialism,  as  mentioned 
before,  are  a  portion  of  the  immediate  program  upon 
which  there  is  unanimity  among  all  shades  of  Social- 
ists. Not  only  do  they  believe  that  the  cooperative 
commonwealth  could  never  endure  under  the  present 
political  system,  but  they  realize  that  In  order  to  pro- 
cure any  considerable  portion  of  their  economic  pro- 
gram they  must  first  bring  the  control  into  the  hands 
of  the  popular  majority  rather  than  of  the  financially 
powerful  minority. 

"  Every  Socialist  party  In  the  world,"  writes  Mr. 
Walling,  "  puts  political  democracy  first  on  its  pro- 
gram, including  those  devices  —  a  secret  ballot,  pro- 
portional representation  and  direct  legislation  — 
which  are  found  absolutely  essential  to  its  effective 
operation."  •' 

^  Bull.,  January,  1910. 

*  L.  Kopelin  in  N.  Y.  Worker,  July  13,  1907. 

»  N.  Y.  Call,  Nov.  7,  1909. 


1 82  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

First  of  these  is  the  demand  common  to  every  So- 
cialist platform  in  the  world,  —  unrestricted  and 
equal  suffrage  for  men  and  women.  In  the  Socialist 
Party  the  women  have  recently  secured  the  addition 
to  the  demand  of  an  actual  pledge  to  engage  in  an 
active  campaign  in  that  direction,  and  since  its  in- 
sertion the  party  has  come  vigorously  to  the  support 
of  its  women  agitators.  A  Woman's  National  Com- 
mittee has  been  created  with  a  special  General  Cor- 
respondent, and  Local  Woman's  Committees  exist  as 
integral  parts  of  the  various  local  organizations.^ 
Last  year,  for  the  first  time,  a  woman,  Lena  Morrow 
Lewis,  was  elected  to  the  National  Executive  Com- 
mittee. The  party  has  designated  the  last  Sunday 
in  February  as  Women's  Day,  on  which  special  suf- 
frage propaganda  is  engaged  in  throughout  the 
country. 

The  Socialist  women  in  New  York  have  decided  in 
convention  to  keep  their  work  generally  distinct  from 
the  non-socialist  suffrage  organizations,  cooperating 
with  them  only  occasionally  and  for  definite  pur- 
poses.^ There  is,  however,  far  less  friction  between 
Socialist  and  "  bourgeois  "  suffragists  than  appears 
between  the  Socialists  and  reformers  in  other  fields. 
Socialist  women  are  in  the  habit  of  joining  the 
workers  for  Woman  Suffrage  in  public  speaking,  cir- 
culating petitions,  arranging  demonstrations,  and 
appearing  before  legislative  committees;  and  oppo- 
nents of  the  suffrage  are  beginning  to  use  the  associa- 
tion of  the  movement  with  Socialism  as  an  argument 
in  its  disfavor.^ 

»  S.  P.  Off.  Bull.,  December,  1910. 

»  A.  C.  Block,  N.  Y.  Call,  Dec.  19,  1909. 

»  N.  Y.  Call,  Jan.  5,  19 10. 


OF   THE   PRESENT    DAY  183 

The  New  York  municipal  program  includes  Wo- 
man Suffrage  in  its  demands,  and  the  Wisconsin  legis- 
lators have  made  efforts  in  this  direction,  so  far  with- 
out success.  Representative  Morrill  has  made  him- 
self the  active  champion  of  Woman  Suffrage  in  the 
Massachusetts  legislature. 

The  Study  Course  in  Socialism  enlarges  the  de- 
mand to  universal,  equal,  direct  and  secret  suffrage.^ 
It  suggests  agitation  for  direct  suffrage  chiefly  in  the 
case  of  the  election  of  senators,  and  considers  the 
principle  of  secret  suffrage  fairly  well  secured  by 
the  use  of  the  Australian  ballot,  although  needing 
in  many  states  to  be  perfected  in  details.  It  gives  as 
a  further  aim  of  Socialism:  — 

"  The  removal  of  all  restrictions  based  on  ances- 
try, on  race  or  nativity,  on  sex,  on  the  possession  of 
property,  on  education  or  on  length  of  residence  ex- 
cept in  so  far  as  this  last  may  be  necessary  to  prevent 
the  corrupt  practices  known  as  '  colonization  '  or  the 
voting  of  '  floaters.'  "  ^ 

The  national  program  seeks  to  secure  direct  legis- 
lation by  the  initiative  and  referendum,  proportional 
representation,  and  the  right  of  recall,  and  the  New 
York  platform  emphasizes  all  but  the  third.  The 
Social  Democrats  of  Wisconsin  have  steadily  worked 
for  direct  legislation,  both  generally  and  in  specific 
instances,  and  are  introducing  this  year  bills  pro- 
viding for  the  recall  in  the  case  of  local  ofllicers,  for 
the  initiative  and  referendum  on  acts  of  municipal 
councils  or  county  boards,  and  the  amendment  of  city 
charters  by  direct  action  of  the  people. 

It  may  be  noted  that  each  of  these  political  princl- 

1  N.  y.  Call,  March  7,  19 10. 


184  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

pies  Is  employed  in  the  internal  affairs  of  the  Socialist 
Party,  as  of  the  labor  unions,  and  that,  while  the 
right  of  recall  does  not  yet  exist,  the  Socialist  Party 
always  requires  of  the  candidate  for  public  office 
a  signed  resignation  to  be  presented  to  the  proper 
authorities  in  case  of  a  violation  of  trust. 

The  national  demand  for  the  abolition  of  the 
Senate  is  in  harmony  with  the  international  Socialist 
demand  for  doing  away  with  the  upper  parliamentary 
house.  The  Wisconsin  legislators  have  proposed 
resolutions  to  this  effect;  and  Berger,  during  his  first 
month  in  Congress,  introduced  a  bill  to  abolish  the 
Senate  and  substitute  for  it  the  referendum  as  a  check 
upon  the  House  of  Representatives. 

The  national  program  calls  for  the  abolition  of  the 
power  of  the  Supreme  Court  to  pass  upon  the  con- 
stitutionality of  legislation  and  for  the  repeal  or 
abrogation  of  national  laws  only  by  act  of  Congress 
or  popular  referendum.  The  New  York  platform 
adds :  — 

"  A  show  of  power,  by  an  increased  vote  of  the 
Socialist  Party  and  the  election  of  some  of  its  can- 
didates will  be  an  effective  warning  to  the  capitalistic 
courts  that  will  make  them  pause  in  their  despotic 
course." 

While  most  of  the  purely  political  planks  of  the 
Socialist  platform  appear  also  as  reforms  proposed 
by  other  radicals,  the  amendability  of  the  Constitu- 
tion by  majority  vote  is  one  of  the  demands  con- 
sidered by  William  English  Walling  so  revolutionary 
as  to  be  exclusively  Socialist  property.^  The  Wiscon- 
sin Socialists  are  agitating,  so  far  without  success, 

»  N.  Y.  Call,  Dec.  I2,  1909. 


OF   THE   PRESENT   DAY  185 

for  both  state  and  national  constitutional  conventions, 
and  Berger  has  introduced  into  Congress  a  bill  pro- 
viding for  the  latter. 

Reform  of  the  judiciary  branch  of  government  is 
demanded  in  that  all  judges  be  elected  by  the  people 
for  short  terms,  and  that  the  power  to  issue  injunc- 
tions be  curbed  by  immediate  legislation.  The  New 
York  platform  gives  merely  a  general  denunciation 
of  the  injunction.  Although  Mr.  Walling  classes  the 
abolition  of  the  injunction  as  one  of  the  revolu- 
tionary demands  never  to  be  passed  until  the  triumph 
of  Socialism,  the  Wisconsin  Social  Democrats  are 
already  introducing  into  the  legislature  resolutions 
on  both  subjects  mentioned  above.^ 

Administrative  demands  include  a  graduated  in- 
come tax  and  the  extension  of  inheritance  taxes, 
graduated  in  proportion  to  the  amount  of  the  bequest 
and  nearness  of  kin.  The  New  York  Socialists  con- 
fine their  tax  reform,  however,  chiefly  to  demanding 
that  the  arrears  of  taxes  due  to  the  city  from  private 
corporations  be  immediately  collected,  and  the  ef- 
forts in  Wisconsin  are  directed  to  such  details  as  the 
semi-annual  payment  of  taxes  and  the  valuation  of 
land  for  public  purposes  by  adding  10%  to  the  last 
previous  assessed  valuation  thereof. 

Says  the  Study  Course  in  Socialism:  ^  — 

"  Socialists  are  not  dogmatic  free  traders,  and  do 
not  consider  free  trade  in  itself  a  thing  worth  striving 
for.  They  are  in  general,  however,  opposed  to  indi- 
rect taxation  —  tariffs  on  Imports  or  exports,  excises, 
trade  licenses,  etc.,  —  especially  in  so  far  as  these 
tend  to  raise  the  prices  of  the  necessities  of  life. 

1  N.  Y.  Call,  Dec.  12,  1909.  ]  .    »  Ibid.,  March  21,  1910. 


1 86  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

They  seek  to  introduce  and  promote  the  use  of  the 
graduated  income  tax  and  the  graduated  inheritance 
tax  as  the  principal  sources  of  government  revenue. 
These  taxes  are  advocated  by  Socialists,  not  as  a 
means  of  equalizing  wealth  or  of  checking  its  con- 
centration, but  as  a  means  of  furnishing  the  govern- 
ment with  the  necessary  revenues  with  the  least 
hardship  to  the  producing  classes." 

Socialists  differ  from  Single  Taxers  in  refusing  to 
differentiate  from  the  '*  indirect "  tax  on  real  prop- 
erty a  "  direct  "  tax  on  land  values.^  Both  stand  for 
the  general  principle  of  land  nationalization,  but 
while  the  Single  Taxer  wishes  to  nationalize  all  land 
values  and  no  capital  goods,  the  Socialist  draws  the 
line  rather  between  the  land  and  capital  goods  used 
socially  on  the  one  hand,  and  those  employed  for 
individual  purposes  on  the  other.  As  before  stated, 
capital  denotes  to  the  Marxian  a  relationship  and  not 
a  mere  thing.  The  Socialists  and  followers  of  Henry 
George  meet  at  many  points  in  their  arraignment  of 
conditions  that  produce  poverty,  their  emphasis  upon 
democracy  and  free  opportunity,  and  their  denuncia- 
tion of  the  private  control  of  natural  resources. 
There  has  been  frequent  passing  to  and  fro  between 
the  lines,  and  once  a  temporary  alliance,  but,  in  so 
far  as  the  Single  Tax  looks  to  a  restoration  of  com- 
petition, it  leans  rather  toward  the  radical  Demo- 
crats, and  is  thus  opposed  by  Socialism. 

A  demand  illustrative  of  "  class-consciousness  "  is 
that  for  the  separation  of  the  present  Bureau  of 
Labor  from  the  Department  of  Commerce  and 
Labor,  and  the  establishment  of  an  independent 
Department  of  Labor. 

*  Hillquit,  op.  cit.,  p.  289,  295. 


OF   THE   PRESENT   DAY  187 

The  most  fundamental  of  the  social  demands  is 
that  for  the  absolute  freedom  of  press,  speech,  and 
assemblage.  The  Socialists  of  Wisconsin  have  ap- 
parently passed  beyond  the  need  for  this  demand 
with  their  conquest  of  a  degree  of  political  power,  but 
the  New  York  platform  makes  of  it  a  special  article, 
coupling  with  it  the  right  to  freedom  of  Sunday  recre- 
ation. The  Socialists  are  always  active  in  agitating 
for  these  claims,  and  have  recently  assisted  the  Indus- 
trial Workers  of  the  World  in  Spokane,  the  officials 
of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor,  and  the  revo- 
lutionists in  Spain  and  Mexico  in  their  conflicts  with 
the  authorities  on  these  matters.^ 

The  free  administration  of  justice  is  a  demand  of 
the  national  platform  which  has  been  approached 
by  the  Wisconsin  Socialists  through  measures  pro- 
viding that  the  cost  of  appeal  may  under  certain  cir- 
cumstances be  borne  by  the  state  and  that  a  "  public 
defender  "  be  appointed  in  each  county  to  conduct 
cases  of  the  poor.^  At  present,  however,  the  Social- 
ists in  that  state  appear  to  be  dealing  chiefly  with 
minor  reforms  in  the  conduct  of  the  lower  courts. 

There  is  a  call  for  the  enactment  of  further  meas- 
ures for  general  education  and  for  the  conservation 
of  health,  the  formation  of  the  Bureau  of  Education 
into  a  Department,  and  the  creation  of  a  Department 
of  Public  Health.  New  York  makes  much  of  the 
subject  of  education,  asking  that 

"  public  kindergartens  and  playgrounds  be  estab- 
lished in  connection  with  every  school,  that  ample 
school  accommodations  be  provided  and  an  adequate 
force  of  teachers  be  provided,  and  that  meals,  cloth- 

*  See  Account  of  Free  Speech  League,  Call,  May  21,  1910. 
2  Thompson,  op.  cit.,  p.  52,  56. 


1 88  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

ing,  and  medical  attendance  be  furnished  to  all  school 
children  who  may  require  them." 

The  Wisconsin  Socialists  are  active  in  the  depart- 
ment of  education,  directing  their  efforts  chiefly 
toward  the  extension  of  trade  and  agricultural 
schools,  and  of  the  university  system,  and  toward  the 
supplying  of  free  text-books  throughout  the  state. 
Although  for  some  time  previous  to  191 1  they  had 
been  represented  by  several  members  on  the  Mil- 
waukee School  Board,^  the  reaction  following  the 
Socialist  victory  of  19 10  was  so  strong  as  to  drive 
the  Socialists,  for  a  time  at  least,  from  this  depart- 
ment of  the  city  government. 

The  pubhc  health  is  considered  in  the  New  York 
program  by  proposals  for  protection  against  accident 
to  laborers  on  public  works,  for  the  erection  by  the 
city  of  model  dwellings  to  be  let  at  cost,  and  for  an 
efficient  system  of  municipal  hospitals  and  medical 
service.  One  of  the  resolutions  carried  through  the 
city  council  of  Milwaukee  by  the  Socialists  provided 
for  a  $300  appropriation  to  bring  a  tuberculosis  ex- 
hibit to  the  city;  and  one  of  the  first  acts  of  Mayor 
Seidel  of  that  city  was  to  appoint  as  Health  Commis- 
sioner, against  the  wishes  of  partisan  Socialists,  a 
non-Socialist  expert.^ 

First  in  the  national  program  by  virtue  of  their 
essentially  Socialist  character,  but  last  in  the  practical 
efforts  of  the  party  in  view  of  their  necessary  post- 
ponement in  perfection  to  the  time  of  Socialism  tri- 
umphant, are  the  demands  for  the  public  ownership 
and  control  of  capital. 


*  Hunter,  New  York  Call,  Mar.  17,  1910. 

*  Thompson,  op.  cit.,  p.  39.     Emil  Seidel  in  N.  Y.  Call,  June  2, 1910. 


OF   THE   PRESENT   DAY  189 

Of  greatest  practical  importance  Is  that  for 

*'  the  Immediate  government  relief  for  the  unem- 
ployed workers  by  building  schools,  by  reforesting 
of  cut-over  and  waste  lands,  by  reclamation  of  arid 
tracts,  and  the  building  of  canals,  and  by  extending 
all  other  useful  public  works.  All  persons  employed 
on  such  works  shall  be  employed  directly  by  the  gov- 
ernment under  an  eight-hour  workday  and  at  the  pre- 
vailing union  wages.  The  government  shall  also  loan 
money  to  states  and  municipalities  without  interest 
for  the  purpose  of  carrying  on  public  works." 

The  New  York  Socialists  ask 

"  that  the  powers  of  the  city  government  shall  be  so 
extended  as  to  enable  it  to  engage  in  any  industry  or 
public  works  It  may  see  fit  to  undertake,  especially 
during  industrial  crises,  for  the  purpose  of  giving  em- 
ployment to  those  thrown  out  of  work." 

They  devote  the  greater  part  of  their  program  to 
an  amplification  of  this  demand,  including  Immediate 
work  for  the  unemployed  on  the  proposed  subways, 
bridges,  etc.,  the  reclamation  of  all  franchises  now 
held  by  private  corporations,  and  the  acquiring  and 
operating  by  the  city  of  all  street  railways,  ferries,  gas 
and  electric  plants,  telephones.  Ice  plants,  coal  yards, 
milk  depots,  etc.,  with  the  application  of  the  income 
from  these  industries  to  the  Improvement  of  the  con- 
dition of  the  mass  of  employes  and  of  the  public 
service. 

The  Milwaukee  Socialists  have  secured  for  their 
city  the  promise  of  a  municipal  lighting  plant,  after 
a  long  struggle  extending  through  the  city  council  and 
the  state  legislature,  but  the  courts  have  so  far  pre- 


I90  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

sented  obstacles  to  the  actual  establishment  of  the 
enterprise.^  They  are  working  for  the  establishment 
of  a  municipal  plumbing  business,  and  for  a  succes- 
sion of  franchise  bills  tending  to  secure  city  control 
and  ultimate  public  ownership  of  public  utilities. 

The  attitude  of  Socialists  toward  Municipal 
Ownership  parties  and  government  ownership  in  gen- 
eral is  a  frequent  source  of  misunderstanding.  Since 
the  ownership  of  the  means  of  production  by  society 
is  the  most  conspicuous  feature  of  ultimate  Socialism, 
the  student  is  often  at  a  loss  to  comprehend  the  lack 
of  enthusiasm  among  Socialists  for  the  "  public  util- 
ities "  planks  that  every  now  and  then  appear  in  a 
third  party  platform,  or  for  the  successful  experi- 
ments in  municipal  ownership  that  have  been  con- 
ducted by  European  cities.  Collectivism,  however,  is 
to  the  Socialist  not  an  end,  but  a  means  to  the  goal 
of  the  abolition  of  exploitation-  As  a  method  of 
attaining  this  end,  the  ownership  of  industry  by  the 
present  state  seems  to  him  of  but  doubtful  advan- 
tage, and  in  no  case  worth  the  price  of  compromise.* 
He  accepts  the  argument  of  the  anti-Socialist  that, 
in  view  of  the  present  corruption  of  American  gov- 
ernment, any  such  experiment  stands  a  large  chance 
of  failure,  and  believes  that  in  that  case  it  is  likely 
to  be  quoted  as  an  instance  of  the  impracticability 
of  Socialism.  If  it  succeeds,  on  the  other  hand, 
under  the  jurisdiction  of  a  capitalist  government,  the 
laboring  class  will  not  necessarily  receiv^e  appreciable 
benefit.  According  to  the  principle  of  economic  self- 
interest,  any  middle-class  party  which  secures  gov- 
ernment ownership  may  be  expected  to  carry  on  this 

*  Ttompnoo,  op.  cit^  p.  15,  17. 

*  Slcbcdin,  Call,  Oct.  31,  Nov.  21,  1909. 


OF   THE   PRESENT   DAY  191 

industry  for  the  advantage  of  the  middle  class ;  and 
only  an  avowedly  working-class  party  can  be  counted 
on  to  manage  production  in  the  interest  of  the 
workers. 

The  Study  Course  explains  clearly  the  Socialist 
attitude  on  this  point: 

"  In  advocating  public  ownership  Socialists  de- 
clare, and  in  helping  to  effect  it  they  will  seek  to  make 
sure,  that  it  shall  not  be  regarded  or  used  as  a  means 
of  providing  revenue  for  the  government  and  thus 
relieving  the  propertied  classes  from  taxation.  .  .  . 
The  first  care  of  the  government  or  municipality 
should  be  to  improve  and  extend  the  service  and  to 
improve  the  condition  of  the  workers  employed- 
Furthermore,  in  this  connection,  the  Socialist  Party 
must  be  alert  to  use  its  own  influence  and  enlist  that 
of  the  labor  unions  to  prevent  public  employes  being 
brought  under  a  semi-militar\'  discipline  and  de- 
prived of  civil  and  political  rights  by  reason  of  their 
being  in  public  employ."  ^ 

The  national  program  next  prescribes  the  collec- 
tive ownership  of  all  means  of  social  transportation 
and  communication,  including  railroads,  telegraphs, 
telephones,  and  steamship  lines,  the  words  **  and  all 
land  "  having  been  stricken  out  by  referendum  as 
explained  in  a  previous  chapter.  The  original  para- 
graph relating  to  land  is  somewhat  vague,  reading  as 
follows : 

*'  That  occupancy  and  use  of  land  be  the  sole  title 
to  possession.  The  scientific  reforestation  of  timber 
lands  and  the  reclamation  of  swamp  lands.     The 

»  N.  Y.  Cill,  Mir.  21,  191a 


192  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

land  so  reforested  or  reclaimed  to  be  permanently 
retained  as  a  part  of  the  public  domain." 

The  referendum  just  mentioned,  however,  has  added 
to  the  platform  a  series  of  statements  as  to  land 
(quoted  above,  p.  124),  which  indicate  clearly  the 
probability  of  only  a  partial  nationalization  of  land 
under  a  Socialist  regime. 

This  portion  of  the  national  demands  is  completed 
by  a  call  for  the  collective  ownership  of  all  industries 
which  are  organized  on  a  national  scale  and  in  which 
competition  has  virtually  ceased  to  exist,  and  of  such 
natural  resources  as  mines,  quarries,  oil  wells,  forests, 
and  water  power.  The  party  in  Wisconsin  are  work- 
ing at  present  to  influence  Congress  toward  the  tak- 
ing over  of  all  railroads  which  pass  into  the  hands 
of  a  federal  receiver,  and  ultimately  all  railroads, 
express  companies,  telegraph  and  telephone  plants, 
and  all  trusts  and  monopolies.  They  have  intro- 
duced and  supported  resolutions  to  preserve  the 
state  control  of  water  power,  and  are  now  agitating 
for  a  state  board  of  public  works,  aiming  at  the  re- 
tention and  extension  of  natural  resources  in  general. 
The  parcels  post  and  postal  savings  banks  also  are 
reforms  coming  under  the  Wisconsin  program. 

The  entire  problem  of  monopolies  furnishes  a  test 
for  distinguishing  the  Socialist  from  the  social  re- 
former. The  most  conspicuous  reform  in  America 
at  present  is  that  dealing  with  the  control  of  corpo- 
rations and  the  restoration  of  competition  by  the 
enforcement  of  anti-trust  and  railroad  laws.  The 
party  Socialist,  however,  holds  distinctly  aloof  from 
these  movements.  According  to  the  Socialist  phi- 
losophy, the  trust  is  the  natural  transitional  form  be- 
tween individualist  and  socialist  enterprise.     It  has 


OF   THE   PRESENT   DAY  193 

come  to  stay,  and,  as  the  economic  power  must  al- 
ways be  superior  to  the  merely  political,  any  attempt 
to  check  or  control  it  cannot  escape  the  fate  of  the 
various  other  laws  that  have  attempted  to  turn  back 
the  tide  of  industrial  development. 

"  They  are  bound  to  perish,"  says  the  national 
platform,  "  as  the  numerous  middle  class  reform 
movements  of  the  past  have  perished."  ^ 

The  Appeal  to  Reason  expresses  the  same  point  of 
view: 

"  The  Apostles  of  Compromise  are  with  us 
to-day  talking  of  regulation  and  control.  But 
capitalism  refuses  the  dose  —  and  so  it,  too,  must  be 
abolished."  2 

We  have  in  this  chapter  compared  the  demands  of 
the  national  platform  of  the  Socialist  Party  with 
those  of  the  New  York  Municipal  Program,  the 
working  Social-Democratic  faction  in  the  Wisconsin 
legislature,  and  the  Social-Democratic  government  of 
Milwaukee.  Of  these  the  New  York  program  is  on 
the  whole  less  definite  than  the  national,  giving  more 
space  to  denunciation  of  abuses  than  to  constructive 
measures, — the  natural  attitude  of  a  party  of  pro- 
test; the  Wisconsin  plan,  on  the  contrary,  is  that  of 
actual  law-makers,  revolutionary  and  protesting  in 
matters  beyond  the  legislative  horizon,  but  utilita- 
rian and  diplomatic  regarding  measures  under  pres- 
ent consideration,  making  haste  slowly  and  grasping 
at  half  a  loaf  when  the  whole  seems  out  of  reach. 
These  two  points  of  view  are  typical  of  the  divisions 

*  Platform,  p.  6. 

*  Appeal  to  Reason,  Aug.  3,  1907. 


194  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

in  Socialist  tactics,  later  on  to  be  discussed  in  greater 
detail. 

The  attitude  of  Socialism  to  non-socialist  plans  of 
amelioration  has  appeared  at  several  points  in  this 
chapter,  and  it  has  been  evident  that  the  bona  fide 
Socialist,  whether  constructivist  or  revolutionist, 
differs  fundamentally  from  the  most  radical  social 
reformer.  Where  the  latter  supports  every  move-' 
ment  that  in  itself  works  for  social  betterment  and 
opposes  every  one  of  an  opposite  tendency,  the  So- 
cialist asks  first  the  relation  of  the  movement  to  the 
working  class  and  the  social  revolution.  Of  all  the 
ameliorative  institutions  outside  itself,  the  Socialist 
Party  gives  unqualified  support  only  to  the  labor 
unions  and  the  workmen's  cooperatives. 

There  are,  indeed,  a  number  of  Socialists  inti- 
mately associated  with  the  party  members  and  exer- 
cising a  decided  influence  among  them  who  remain 
unaffiliated  for  the  very  reason  that  they  wish  free- 
dom to  support  any  reform  that  seems  of  itself  good; 
but  the  motto,  "  Timeo  Danaos  et  dona  ferentes," 
represents  the  typical  attitude  of  the  Socialist  parties 
of  America. 


CHAPTER   XIII 

THE   SOCIALIST  METHOD   OF  ATTAINMENT  —  PARTY 
ORGANIZATION  AND  TACTICS 

Although  the  Communist  Manifesto  contains  at 
least  a  suggestion  of  violence,  and  although  Marx 
was  not  without  dreams  of  a  catastrophic  and  bloody 
revolution,  the  whole  activity  of  that  leader  goes  to 
show  that  these  dreams  were  merely  lapses  into 
Utopianism  and  that  his  real  ideal  was  that  of  a 
peaceful  "  revolutionary  "  evolution.^  Therefore 
the  Socialist  Party  is  Marxian  in  that  the  advocacy 
of  physical  force  forms  no  part  of  its  propaganda, 
cither  public  or  private.  Victor  Berger  declares  that 
the  road  to  a  peaceful  revolution,  without  violent 
upheavals  and  cataclysms,  is  by  way  of  the  Socialist 
ticket.^ 

According  to  Debs, 

"  The  working-class  intends  to  use  its  political 
power,  through  the  machinery  of  popular  govern- 
ment and  free  elections,  to  force  compliance  with  its 
demands  by  peaceful,  legal,  and  constitutional  meth- 
ods, to  the  end  that  wage  slavery  may  be  entirely 
abohshed."  ^ 

While  the  previous  declarations  are  consistent  with 
the  opposition  of  Socialists  towards  all  war,  yet  they 

'  Spargo,  Sidelights,  etc.,  p.  43. 

*  Soc.  Campaign  Book,  1908,  p.  23. 

•  Soc.  Campaign  Book,  1908,  p.  £.  ^ 


196  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

hope  for,  rather  than  promise,  a  revolution  by  peace- 
ful means,  and  it  cannot  be  said  that  the  majority 
have  adopted  the  Quaker  attitude  toward  physical 
violence.  It  is  recognized  that  the  working-class 
bears  the  brunt  of  internal  as  well  as  foreign  con- 
flict, and  that  in  a  country  of  universal  suffrage  the 
ballot  is  more  effectual  than  the  bullet.  The  economic 
determinism  of  Socialist  philosophy,  moreover,  pre- 
cludes any  ethical  condemnation  of  individuals  or 
classes,  and  thus  leaves  no  logical  place  for  vindic- 
tiveness.  Many  Socialists,  on  the  other  hand,  be- 
lieve that  capitalism  will  not  yield  to  expropriation 
without  physical  struggle,  and  the  more  ardent  spirits 
do  not  always  conceal  their  enthusiasm  at  the  pros- 
pect. American  Socialists  are  usually  in  whole- 
hearted sympathy  with  revolutionists  all  over  the 
world,  excusing  bomb-throwing  in  such  countries  as 
Russia  by  the  fact  that  the  people  are  excluded  from 
the  weapons  of  peaceful  political  activity.  While 
violence  in  labor  disputes  is  not  advocated  by  Social- 
ists, arguments  against  it  are  seldom  based  on  any 
other  ground  than  expediency;  and  a  certain  element 
in  the  Socialist  Party,  represented  chiefly  by  the 
"  revolutionists "  of  the  industrial  organizations, 
tend  to  look  upon  physical  conflict  as  an  essential 
accompaniment  of  the  economic  or  political  struggle 
between  classes.^ 

Modern  international  Socialism,  as  the  organized 
expression  of  the  class  struggle,  works  through  three 
accepted  channels,  —  the  labor  union,  the  coopera- 
tive, and  the  political  party.  While  the  social  revo- 
lution could  conceivably  be  accomplished  through  the 

*  See  L,  Duchez  in  I.  S.  R.,  Nov.  1909,  p.  410,  and  Robt.  Wheeler 
in  the  same,  April,  1910,  p.  883. 


OF   THE   PRESENT   DAY  197 

third  alone,  the  first  form  of  the  movement,  and  to  a 
less  extent  the  second,  are  of  importance  in  raising 
the  immediate  condition  of  the  working  class  and  in 
preparing  them  for  united  action. 

The  cooperative,  which  in  Belgium  is  the  close 
partner  of  Socialism,  is  here  only  beginning,  after 
many  sporadic  attempts  and  failures.  Aside  from 
the  general  difficulty  of  workmen's  societies  in  ac- 
quiring the  necessary  capital,  the  American  cooper- 
ative attempts  have  been  especially  hindered  by  the 
circumstances  of  a  polyglot  population,  an  estrange- 
ment between  Socialism  and  the  more  powerful  labor 
organizations,  and  the  rival  power  of  the  trusts.  At 
present,  however,  there  are  in  various  American 
towns  a  small  but  growing  number  of  distributive 
cooperative  societies  under  Socialist  control  or  influ- 
ence. A  strong  impetus  has  recently  been  given  to 
the  movement  in  New  York  by  the  formation  of  sev- 
eral general  cooperatives,  that  which  has  met  with 
the  strongest  Socialist  support  being  the  American 
Wholesale  Cooperative.^  This  association  has  en- 
tered into  an  alliance  with  the  Chicago  Wholesale 
Cooperative,  with  which  it  has  divided  the  territory 
of  the  Eastern  United  States.^  It  is  modeled  upon 
the  Belgian  rather  than  the  Rochdale  plan,  having 
but  one  class  of  members,  the  stockholders,  who  re- 
ceive full  dividends.  Outside  buyers  are  given  cer- 
tificates entitling  them  to  membership  if  they  so  de- 
sire whenever  their  purchases  have  reached  a  speci- 
fied amount.  As  in  the  Belgian  societies,  a  certain 
percentage  of  profit  is  to  be  devoted  to  propaganda, 

^  Cooperation;  The   Cooperative  League;  P.   Vlag  in  N.  Y.   Call, 
Dec.  19,  1909;  M.  Kaplan,  Call,  Feb.  6,  1910. 
«  N.  Y.  Call,  March  7,  1910. 


198  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

and  another  portion  to  benefit  features,  the  Incentive 
of  money-making  being  much  less  pronounced  than 
in  the  Rochdale  plan.  Beginning  by  supplying  goods 
to  the  retail  cooperatives  already  existing,  the  society 
hopes  to  extend  their  number  and  unite  them  eventu- 
ally into  an  economic  power,  but  no  attempt  at  pro- 
ductive cooperation  will  be  made  until  a  firm  basis 
for  distribution  Is  secured.  As  the  American  Whole- 
sale Cooperative  has  existed  but  little  over  a  year,  it 
is  too  early  to  make  any  judgment  as  to  its  efficiency. 

While  in  most  European  countries  the  labor  unions 
and  the  Socialists  are  very  closely  connected,  In  the 
United  States,  as  we  have  noticed,  there  is  a  complex 
situation,  in  which  the  largest  labor  organization  in 
the  country  is  still  opposed  to  independent  political 
action.  The  relation  of  Socialism  to  organized  labor 
furnishes  an  important  problem  to  the  Socialist  Party 
at  present,  giving  rise,  on  the  one  hand,  to  sugges- 
tions of  the  formation  of  a  Labor  Party  upon  the 
English  lines,  and  on  the  other  to  a  line  of  policy 
based  upon  that  of  the  Syndicalists  and  anti-parlia- 
mentarians of  Southern  Europe.^  Leaving  the  mat- 
ter of  the  Labor  Party  to  a  later  chapter,  we  will 
here  note  briefly  the  differing  views  in  the  latter 
controversy. 

An  active  minority  In  the  Socialist  Party,  while 
they  do  not  go  so  far  as  to  advise  against  participa- 
tion in  politics,  are  yet  inclined  to  belittle  it  more  or 
less  as  compared  with  economic  organization.  While 
a  growing  control  of  the  government  Is  advantageous 
to  the  proletariat  in  that  it  will  prevent  the  use  of  the 
judiciary  and  the  military  against  them.  It  Is  not  by 
legislative  processes  that  the  workers  are  to  obtain 

*  See  Sombart,  op.  cit.,  p.  lOO,  seq. 


OF   THE   PRESENT    DAY  199 

emancipation,  but  by  the  "  direct  action  "  of  popular 
demonstrations,  the  boycott  and  the  general  strike. 
Sorel,  the  French  Syndicalist,  writes : 

"The  day  is  perhaps  not  so  far  distant  when 
the  best  definition  of  Socialism  will  be  '  General 
Strike.'  "  1 

Since  this  direct  action  involves  the  use  of  physi- 
cal rather  than  moral  means,  the  purely  industrial 
weapon  of  the  strike  is  frequently  supplemented  by 
that  of  passive  resistance,  as  in  the  free  speech  fight 
in  Spokane,  and  sometimes  by  actual  or  threatened 
violence,  as  certain  Socialists  claim  with  regard  to 
the  strike  at  McKees  Rocks  in  1909.^ 

American  Socialism  has  made  no  official  declara- 
tions regarding  the  general  strike,  and  the  construc- 
tivist  leaders,  Hillquit,  Hunter,  Berger,  and  Gaylord, 
emphasize  this  fact  in  maintaining  that  it  has  found 
no  place  in  the  American  tactics  thus  far.  Spargo 
considers  the  likelihood  of  its  being  employed  here 
as  very  remote;  but  Simons,  Work,  and  James  F. 
Carey  deem  it  possibly  a  valuable  weapon  for  use  in 
an  extremity. 

W.  E.  Walling,  a  vigorous  advocate  of  direct 
action,  believes  that  the  efforts  of  the  Socialist  Party 
should  be  directed  to  securing  for  the  laborer  free- 
dom in  such  action: 

"  The  sympathetic  strike,  the  boycott,  primar}% 
secondary,  and  in  every  other  form,  the  fight  for  the 
rights  of  free  speech  and  free  press,  the  fight  against 
the  police  and  military  rule,  the  fight  against  the 
courts,   .  .  .  and,  finally,  the  fight  for  national  labor 

^  Quoted  by  Sombart,  p.  107. 

'  Duchez  in  I.  S.  R.,  Nov.,  1910,  p.  410. 


200  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

legislation,  which  we  can  only  obtain  after  we  have 
bridled  and  conquered  the  courts,  here  is  a  construc- 
tive program  that  is  already  accepted  by  millions  of 
the  American  working  people.  Socialists  and  Trade 
Unionists  alike.  .  .  .  This  is  the  only  construc- 
tive program.  All  other  '  constructive  '  proposals 
amount  merely  to  the  appointment  of  legislative 
commissions,  lobbying  committees,  etc.,  to  act  as  a 
body  of  assistants  to  the  social  reformers,  to  men 
like  Hearst,  Gaynor,  Hughes,  or  La  Follette."  * 

The  opponents  of  the  general  strike  are  repre- 
sented by  Louis  Wetmore,  a  writer  in  the  New  York 
Call?  The  general  strike  is  first  defined  as  the 
simultaneous  stoppage  of  work  by  most  of  the  men 
in  most  of  the  productive  trades.  After  explaining 
the  conditions  under  which  it  may  be  successful  in 
securing  definite  and  concrete  demands  such  as  the 
eight-hour  day,  the  writer  goes  on  to  consider  its 
availability  as  a  means  to  securing  the  general  con- 
trol of  industry  by  the  people.  He  comes  to  the  con- 
clusion that  it  is 

"  the  most  extreme  and  dangerous  of  tactics  that  the 
working  class  can  use;  for,  as  Jaures  has  aptly 
shown,  it  has  got  to  succeed  the  first  time ;  ...  we 
cannot  use  this  weapon  to  obtain  the  collective  con- 
trol of  industry  at  one  blow,  because  that  control  is 
'  too  large  an  order  '  to  be  secured  in  that  way." 

Finally,  says  Mr.  Wetmore,  it  is  essentially  the 
weapon  of  a  minority,  and  hence  cannot  be  used  to 
usher  in  the  social  revolution. 

While  the  Socialist  Party  has  refrained  from  a 
declaration  as  to  the  form  of  labor  organization,  the 

*  N.  Y.  Call,  Mar.  22,  1910.  *  Ibid.,  Mar.  21,  1910. 


OF  THE   PRESENT  DAY  201 

Socialist  Labor  Party,  in  1908,  resolved  against 
"  Neutrality  "  toward  Trade  Unions,  taking  its  stand 
definitely  for  the  industrial  union  as  against  the  craft 
organization,  and  for  the  necessity  of  "  backing  up 
the  ballot  "  with  the  forces  of  organized  labor.^ 

The  political  party,  always  the  chief  weapon  of 
Socialism,  is  in  this  country  its  only  considerable  man- 
ifestation. It  bears  little  resemblance,  however,  to 
the  political  party  as  we  know  it  in  the  United  States. 
While  the  Republican  or  Democratic  Party  consists 
chiefly  of  a  vast  and  shifting  body  of  voters  centering 
about  one  permanent  inner  circle  of  practical  legis- 
lators and  another  of  professional  politicians,  and 
confining  their  duties  for  the  most  part  to  Election 
Day,  the  mission  of  the  Socialist  parties  is  to  "  agi- 
tate, educate,  organize";  thus  the  matters  of  pre- 
paring platforms,  nominating  candidates,  and  win- 
ning votes  are  merely  incidental  to  the  work  of  prop- 
aganda and  organization  of  the  working-class.  It  is 
of  some  importance,  therefore,  to  study  its  organiza- 
tion and  routine  methods  before  taking  up  the  more 
complex  matter  of  tactics. 

Any  man  or  woman  is  eligible  for  membership  in 
the  Socialist  Party  who  is  over  eighteen  years  of  age, 
who  will  sign  the  pledge  already  reproduced,  recog- 
nizing the  class  struggle,  and  severing  connections 
with  other  political  parties,  and  who  will  subscribe 
to  the  principles  of  the  party,  specifically  including 
political  action.2 

The  only  exceptions  to  eligibility  are  persons  hold- 
ing offices  honorary  or  remunerative,  other  than  civil 

*  Resolution  presented  at  Stuttgart  Congress,!  1908,  S.  L.  P.  Plat., 
p.  27. 

«  S.  P.  Nat.  Const.,  Art.  2,  Sec  i,  5. 


202  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

service  positions,  and  including  the  office  of  post- 
master, by  gift  of  any  other  political  party.^  It  is 
important  to  note  also  that  any  member  who  opposes 
political  action  is  to  be  expelled.^ 

The  Socialist  Labor  Party  provides  that  no  one 
be  allowed  to  become  a  member  until  the  presiding 
officer  has  explained  to  him  the  significance  of  the 
class  struggle  and  until  he  has  signed  a  catechism  of 
six  questions  bearing  upon  the  principles  of  the 
party.^ 

In  19 10  the  membership  of  the  Socialist  Party 
numbered  58,011,  thus  constituting  less  than  10% 
of  the  national  vote  (604,756).*  The  facts  that 
fully  5%  of  these  are  under  voting  age,  5%  are 
women,  and  another  small  percentage  are  aliens,  re- 
duce still  further  the  proportion  of  the  party  member- 
ship to  its  voting  strength.^  It  is  by  the  former, 
however,  rather  than  the  latter,  that  the  growth  and 
quality  of  the  Socialist  Party  are  to  be  measured, 
as  the  party  members  constitute  the  dictators  of 
policy,  the  definitely  Socialist  propagandists,  and  the 
permanent  organizers  of  the  fluctuating  adherents 
represented  by  the  official  vote.  In  1908  an  attempt 
was  made  by  the  National  Executive  Committee  to 
collect  statistical  facts  regarding  the  membership, 
and,  though  less  than  15%  of  the  party  were  in- 
cluded in  the  results,  records  are  given  from  39 
different  states,  which  seem  to  be  fairly  representa- 
tive.*^ A  large  majority,  7 1  %  of  the  members,  are  of 
American  birth,  the  nations  ranking  next  being,  in 
order,   Germany,  the  Scandinavian  countries,  Eng- 

1  S.  p.  Nat.  Const.,  June  ii,  1908. 

»  Nat.  Const.,  Art.  2,  Sec.  2,  6.  '  Prin.  of  the  S.  L.  P. 

*  S.  P.  Off.  Biill.,  Jan.,  191 1.  Thompson,  The  Rising  Tide  of  Socialism. 

•  S.  P.  Off.  Bull.,  April,  1909. 


OF   THE    PRESENT   DAY  203 

land,  Finland,  and  Austria.  The  mean  age  occurs 
between  30  and  40  years  for  both  men  and  women. 
Classification  as  to  occupation  shows  that  41%  of  the 
party  are  craftsmen,  and,  as  among  the  states  omitted 
from  the  records  are  the  manufacturing  states  of 
Massachusetts  and  Connecticut,  it  is  probable  that 
this  percentage  is  still  higher  in  the  country  as  a 
whole.  Laborers  are  the  next  largest  class,  num- 
bering 20%,  after  which  come  17%  engaged  in  farm- 
ing, and  small  percentages  in  commerce,  transporta- 
tion, the  professions,  and  housekeeping.  Of  the 
2823  members  reporting  under  the  captions  of  crafts- 
men and  transportation  and  eligible  for  membership 
in  labor  unions  44%  are  members  of  the  American 
Federation  of  Labor,  5%  of  the  Industrial  Workers 
of  the  World,  13%  of  independent  unions,  and  38% 
unaffiliated.  These  statistics  are  borne  out  by  those 
of  the  delegates  to  the  National  Convention  of  1908, 
the  latter  showing,  roughly  speaking,  the  quality  of 
the  party  leaders,  as  the  previous  figures  that  of  the 
rank  and  file.  Of  210  delegates,  151  were  Ameri- 
cans; the  mean  were  between  the  ages  of  30  and 
40,  were  craftsmen  by  occupation  and  had  belonged 
to  the  party  six  years.  Sixty-seven  delegates,  or 
about  one-third  of  the  entire  number,  were  members 
of  labor  unions,  61  of  these  belonging  to  the  Ameri- 
can Federation  of  Labor.^ 

Of  these  two  sets  of  figures,  the  most  interesting 
indications  are,  in  both  cases,  the  majority  of  Ameri- 
cans in  the  Socialist  Party,  and  the  predominance 
of  the  craftsman.  Labor  unionists,  chiefly  members 
of  the  American  Federation,  number  about  one- 
third   of   the    party,    the   percentage    being    rather 

1  Weekly  Bull.,  July  28,  1908. 


204  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

larger  among  the  selected  delegates  than  among  the 
members  as  a  whole. 

Members  are  required  to  pay  dues  of  at  least 
15  cents  a  month,  of  which  five  cents  goes  to  the 
national,  five  to  the  state,  and  the  remainder  to  the 
local  organization.^  Receipts  are  given  in  the  form 
of  dues  stamps,  and  a  member  in  arrears  for  more 
than  three  months  is  subject  to  suspension,  unless 
exempted  because  of  illness  or  unemployment.^  In 
addition  to  the  regular  dues  there  are  frequent  calls 
for  voluntary  contributions,  so  that  the  average  mem- 
ber pays  an  amount  about  equal  to  the  dues  in  small 
sums  for  campaign  funds,  expenses  of  delegates,  etc. 
The  party  has  always  published  an  itemized  account 
of  finances,  and,  according  to  Eugene  V.  Debs,  no 
money  has  ever  been  received  from  any  corporation.* 

"  The  '  old  parties,'  says  an  official  publication, 
"have  no  dues-paying  system;  in  fact,  they  need 
none,  as  the  corruption  funds  '  for  value  received ' 
are  ample  to  support  them  at  all  times,  especially 
during  campaigns.  .  .  .  We  must  not  forget  that  we 
are  living  under  the  competitive  system,  and  that 
pending  its  abolition  our  movement  requires  funds 
for  its  support  from  its  members ;  that  we  must  have 
system  for  this  purpose,  and  that  dependence  on 
'  philanthropists  '  and  '  voluntary  subscriptions  ' 
alone,  tends  to  demoralize,  rather  than  strengthen 
the  party."  * 

The  members  are  grouped  into  town  or  county 
locals,  each  containing  not  less  than  five  members, 
but  persons  in  districts  where  there  is  no  local  may 

*  By-laws,  Local  N.  Y.,  Art.  19.  *  Nat.  Con.,  Art.  12,  Sec,  6. 

•    »  Weekly  Bull.,  July  18,  1908.  *  Why  Socialists  Pay  Dues.     . 


OF  THE    PRESENT  DAY  205 

join  the  party  as  members  at  large. ^  In  large  cities 
the  locals  are  divided  into  branches  by  assembly 
districts,  Brooklyn,  or  Local  Kings  County,  thus  hav- 
ing over  25  assembly  district  branches.^  In  New 
York  County  an  arrangement  has  been  made  by 
which  the  districts  are  grouped  into  nine  large  sub- 
divisions, on  the  ground  that  the  former  is  too 
small  a  unit  for  efficiency  and  leads  to  unnecessary 
duplication  of  machinery.  This  change  is  the  out- 
come of  much  discussion,  and,  if  successful,  will 
doubtless  be  followed  by  other  locals  in  the  state. 
Each  district  branch  elects  officers  corresponding  to 
those  of  the  local,  an  organizer,  secretaries,  treas- 
urer, and  literature  agent,  with  various  standing  com- 
mittees. Throughout  the  Socialist  organization  there 
is  no  permanent  presiding  officer,  the  democratic  ideal 
leading  to  the  election  of  a  temporary  chairman  for 
each  meeting.  Business  meetings  are  held  at  least 
once  a  month,  usually  every  two  weeks,  and  the 
branch  is  expected  to  conduct  systematic  educational 
and  propaganda  work  in  connection  with  these.  For- 
eigners unable  to  speak  English  are  usually  grouped 
into  special  language  branches,  and  the  Local 
Woman's  Committees  sometimes  conduct  special 
study  classes  among  women,  supplementary  to  the 
regular  district  branches.  In  many  places  Socialist 
schools  are  carried  on  for  the  purpose  of  counteract- 
ing the  "  capitalistic  "  influence  of  the  public  schools 
and  instilling  in  children  the  Socialist  ideals.^  In 
New  York  City  these  schools  are  maintained  in  co- 
operation with  a  labor  organization.  The  Workmen's 
Circle. 

»  N.  Y.  State  Con.,  Art.  i,  Sec.  3,  17. 

*  By-Laws,  Local  N.  Y.,  Art.  18. 

'  See  B.  M.  Fraser,  Outline  of  Lessons  for  Soc.  Schools. 


2o6  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

Under  the  direction  of  the  county  organizer,  each 
branch  carries  on  agitation  in  its  own  district,  in- 
cluding the  distribution  of  literature,  the  following 
up  of  Socialist  sympathizers,  and  frequently  the  hold- 
ing of  street  meetings.  The  latter  means  of  agita- 
tion, hitherto  extensively  employed  by  New  York 
Socialists,  has  been  lately  much  criticised  in  the  party 
conferences,  and  is  beginning  to  be  partly  superseded 
by  indoor  lectures  and  distribution  of  literature.  The 
success  of  the  Wisconsin  Social  Democrats  is  claimed 
to  be  due  chiefly  to  the  last-named  form  of  propa- 
ganda, and  the  street  meeting  is  charged  with  at- 
tracting too  often  merely  the  idler  and  the  "  slum 
proletarian,"  who  are  unsatisfactory  material  for 
organization. 

The  county  locals  of  New  York  and  Brooklyn 
meet  in  a  body  but  seldom,  and  then  only  for  special 
business,  such  as  the  instruction  of  national  dele- 
gates. The  work  of  the  branches  is  unified  by  the 
organizer  of  the  county,  often  a  salaried  worker, 
and  by  the  Central  Committee,  in  which  every  branch 
is  represented  according  to  its  membership.^  Each 
town  or  county  nominates  its  own  candidates  for 
local  campaigns  and  conducts  its  affairs  subordi- 
nately  to  the  state  and  national  constitutions. 

The  organization  of  New  York  State  is  conducted 
by  a  State  Committee  elected  by  the  locals,  a  State 
Executive  Committee  consisting  of  the  members  of 
the  former  residing  in  the  vicinity  of  New  York, 
and  a  State  Organizer.^  It  nominates  candidates 
for  the  state  campaign,  and,  subject  to  the  national 
constitution,  possesses  complete  control  over  its  own 
members,  including  the  power  of  suspension  or  ex- 
^1  N.  Y.  By-Laws,  Art.  4.  «  State  Const.,  Art.  2,  Sec.  i,  4,  6.     , 


OF  THE    PRESENT  DAY  207 

pulsion.^  A  State  Convention  is  held  in  the  years 
of  the  gubernatorial  election,  and,  on  the  initiative  of 
three  locals  in  three  counties,  any  question  may  be 
submitted  to  a  referendum  of  the  members.  The 
only  material  restriction  on  the  autonomy  of  the 
state  is  that  it  is  permitted  neither  to  support  nor 
to  enter  into  compromise  with  any  other  political 
party,  nor  to  refrain  from  making  nominations  in 
order  to  favor  an  outside  candidate,  under  penalty 
of  severance  of  connection  with  the  Socialist  Party.^ 

The  Socialist  Labor  Party  confers  less  power  upon 
the  state  organization  than  does  the  Socialist  Party, 
since  it  gives  the  local  complete  freedom  In  the 
matter  of  expulsion  of  members,  and,  on  the  other 
hand,  allows  the  National  Executive  Committee  to 
expel  or  reorganize  "  any  State  Executive  Committee 
guilty  of  disloyalty."  ^ 

Nationally  the  Socialist  Party  conducts  its  affairs 
by  means  of  a  National  Committee,  elected  by  refer- 
endum of  the  states  in  proportion  to  their  member- 
ship, and  consisting  at  present  of  69  persons,  a  Na- 
tional Executive  Committee  of  seven  members  elected 
by  party  referendum,  and  a  salaried  National  Secre- 
tary, chosen  in  the  same  manner.*  A  Woman's 
National  Committee  has  recently  been  formed,  with 
a  General  Correspondent,  who  has  charge  of  the 
propaganda  among  women.^ 

There  are  in  the  United  States  several  national  or- 
ganizations of  foreign-born  Socialists  closely  affili- 
ated with  the  Socialist  Party.^ 

1  State  Const.,  Art.  i,  Sec.  9.  *  Nat.  Const.,  Art.  12,  Sec.  3. 

»  Const,  of  S.  L.  P.,  Art.  2,  Sec.  11,  12;  Art.  3,  Sec.  2;  Art.  5,  Sec.  14  d. 
*  Nat.  Const.,  Art.  3-7;  Referendum  E,  1909. 
»  S.  P.  Off.  Bull.,  Jan.  1910.  «  N.  Y.  Call,  Feb.  8,  1910. 


2o8  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

Subject  to  initiative  and  referendum,  the  national 
committees  and  secretary  circulate  literature,  support 
organizers  and  lecturers,  assist  in  local  matters  when 
requested,  conduct  the  national  campaigns,  and  call 
the  National  Conventions  and  Congresses.  The 
latter  are  composed  of  delegates  from  the  states 
elected  by  the  membership,  the  Convention  meeting 
in  the  years  of  presidential  elections  for  the  purpose 
of  deciding  upon  candidates  and  platforms,  and  the 
Congress  meeting  in  the  alternate  two-year  period 
for  general  discussion  as  to  tactics.^ 

Peculiar  provisions  of  the  Socialist  Labor  Party 
constitution  are  that  the  National  Executive  Com- 
mittee is  given  a  certain  degree  of  discretion  in  sub- 
mitting referendums,  and  is  allowed  somewhat 
broadly  to  "  compensate  its  officers  from  the  party 
treasury  according  to  the  labors  performed."  The 
party  press,  moreover,  is  given  unusual  privileges 
and  restrictions,  as  well: 

"  each  Section  shall  relentlessly  insist  upon  each 
member  being  a  regular  reader  of  the  party  organ, 
except  when  none  such  is  published  in  the  language 
read  by  the  member;  ...  no  member,  committee, 
or  Section  of  the  Party  shall  publish  a  political  paper 
without  the  sanction  of  the  National  Executive  Com- 
mittee; .  .  .  the  National  Executive  Committee 
shall  have  control  of  the  contents  of  all  Party  or- 
gans, and  shall  act  on  grievances  connected  with  the 
same."  ^ 

Each  of  the  American  Socialist  parties  elects  a 
secretary  to  the  International  Socialist  Bureau,  and 

»  Nat.  Const.,  Art.  lo. 

«  Const.  S.  L.  P.,  Art.  5,  Sec.  14  h,  15;  Art.  9, 10;  Art.  2,  Sec.  20,  21. 


OF   THE    PRESENT   DAY  209 

sends  delegates  to  the  International  Congresses  held 
in  Europe  every  few  years.  As  has  before  been 
mentioned,  however,  the  Socialist  Party  claimed  in 
1909  the  right  to  the  second  secretary,  hitherto 
elected  by  the  Socialist  Labor  Party,  on  the  ground 
of  its  large  numerical  superiority.^  It  accordingly 
sent  Mr.  Berger  to  fill  this  second  place.  While 
the  International  organization  refused  to  unseat  Mr. 
De  Leon  of  the  Socialist  Labor  Party,  it  gave  a 
complimentary  "  advisory  "  seat  to  Mr.  Berger,  thus 
tacitly  acknowledging  the  claim  of  the  rival  party. 
Moreover,  as  the  parliamentary  representatives  of 
each  country  have  the  right  to  elect  a  special  repre- 
sentative of  their  own  to  the  Bureau,  Berger,  by  his 
election  to  the  United  States  Congress,  became  by 
that  fact  a  member  with  full  rights.  Accordingly, 
the  Socialist  Party  has  now  two  members  in  the 
International  Bureau,  Morris  Hillquit,  its  official  rep- 
resentative, and  Victor  Berger,  the  parliamentary 
representative. 

The  three  most  striking  points  as  to  the  Socialist 
Party  organization  just  outlined  are,  —  its  close 
discipline,  its  extreme  democracy,  and  its  intimate 
connection  with  Socialism  abroad. 

Through  the  International  Bureau  and  Congresses 
the  American  and  European  Socialists  are  kept  in 
touch  as  to  theory  and  tactics.  They  exchange  bul- 
letins as  to  conditions  of  labor,  discuss  questions  of 
such  mutual  importance  as  immigration  and  disarma- 
ment, and  maintain  a  spirit  of  solidarity  shown  by 
such  facts  as  the  contribution  of  10,000  marks  by 
the  German  Socialist  party  to  the  New  York  Call, 
and  the  forwarding  by  the  American  National  Sec- 

1  S.  P.  Off.  Bulletin,  July,  1909. 


2IO  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

retary  of  over  $6000  to  the  Swedish  general  strike 
of  1909.^  It  is  believed  by  Socialists  that  the  Inter- 
national organization  has  already  become  a  factor 
in  the  peace  of  the  world;  and  Kautsky  views  with 
alarm  the  "  jingoistic "  tendencies  of  the  English 
"  Clarion  "  Socialists  as  likely  to  endanger  the  peace 
of  England  and  Germany  through  its  effect  on  the 
international  Socialist  movement. 

In  the  Socialist  Party  unlimited  power  is  given  to 
the  rank  and  file  by  the  use  of  the  initiative,  refer- 
endum, and  recall.  The  democratic  spirit  thus  sig- 
nified is  carried  into  every  detail  of  the  organization 
to  such  an  extent  that  many  Socialists  are  now  real- 
izing that  a  degree  of  efficiency  is  thereby  sacrificed. 
Not  only  is  the  chairman  elected  anew  at  each  meet- 
ing, but  the  inexperienced  and  incapable  is  called  upon 
to  take  his  turn  at  presiding;  not  only  is  free  speech 
maintained,  but  the  loquacious  orator  is  suffered 
indefinitely  before  the  gavel  falls;  and  in  the  zeal 
for  local  autonomy  committees  are  multiplied  in 
every  branch  until  service  upon  them  signifies  but 
little.  Owing  to  a  recent  decision  to  hold  party  refer- 
endums  open  indefinitely  for  the  requisite  endorse- 
ments, the  referendum  has  become  so  frequent  as 
to  lose  much  of  its  value  as  an  expression  of  deliber- 
ate opinion.^  A  still  more  typical  instance  of  the 
ultra-democratic  spirit  is  shown  in  the  party  vote 
shortening  the  term  of  office  in  the  National  Execu- 
tive Committee  from  two  years  to  one,  and  pro- 
hibiting the  election  of  any  person  for  two  con- 
secutive terms. 

'  N.  Y.  Call,  Jan.  2,  1910;  Report  of  the  National  Secretary,  1910, 
p.  II. 

"  S.  P.  Official  Bulletin,  Jan.,  1910. 


OF   THE    PRESENT   DAY  211 

The  Call  makes  the  charge : 

"  We  have  allowed  the  fetish  of  false  democracy 
to  paralyze  our  organizations.  There  is  not  a  local 
organization  in  America  that  does  not  habitually 
waste  two  or  three  hours  debating  detail  and  rou- 
tine business  that  an  efficient  committee  of  three 
could  dispose  of  in  ten  minutes."  ^ 

The  discipline  of  the  Socialist  parties  is  peculiar 
in  that,  unlike  the  older  parties,  they  have  in  general 
no  emoluments  to  offer  and  no  privileges  to  grant, 
and  even  where  they  possess  these,  are  forbidden  by 
their  own  principles  to  make  use  of  them.  Victor 
Berger  tells  us  that  during  his  experience  in  the  city 
government  of  Milwaukee  he  has  only  once  asked 
for  a  "  job  "  for  a  faithful  party  member;  the  favor 
was  granted,  but  refused  by  the  beneficiary  on  the 
ground  that  it  might  subject  the  party  and  himself 
to  unjust  criticism. 

The  only  weapons  of  the  Socialist  organizations 
are  censure  and  expulsion,  and,  although  these  con- 
vey no  material  penalty,  they  are  used  drastically 
to  keep  the  parties  free  from  undesired  elements. 
From  October,  1906,  to  December,  1908,  at  least 
19  expulsions  were  reported  in  the  Weekly  Bulletin 
of  the  Socialist  Party  National  Committee,  the 
greater  number  of  these  being  penalties  for  the  sup- 
port of  candidates  of  other  political  parties.  The 
decision  of  the  state  is  final  in  these  matters,  and  in 
at  least  two  cases,  those  of  Seattle  and  St.  Louis, 
a  whole  city  local  has  been  expelled  without  con- 
sultation with  the  national  organization.^ 

1  N.  Y.  Call,  Nov.  14,  1909. 

«  Weekly  Bulletin,  July  21,  1907;    S.  P.  Off.  Bulletin,  Feb.,  191 1. 


212  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

In  the  Socialist  Labor  Party,  the  local  section 
possesses  ultimate  power  over  the  individual  mem- 
bers, and  the  National  Executive  over  the  Sections, 
with  the  result  that  this  party  has  at  times  inaugu- 
rated a  somewhat  vigorous  regime  of  "  purification  " 
against  insurgent  elements.^ 

As  the  required  creed  of  the  Socialist  Party  con- 
sists only  of  the  class  struggle  and  political  action, 
and  as  belief  in  these  is  usually  the  motive  for  join- 
ing the  organization,  there  is  little  room  for  disci- 
pline on  points  of  doctrine.  The  imperative  require- 
ment of  "  No  Compromise  "  is  practically  the  only 
ground  for  prosecution,  but  this  has  been  sufficient 
to  figure  in  many  local  disputes. 

The  appropriate  function  of  Socialist  discipline 
is  the  treatment  of  such  cases  as  those  of  Briand 
and  Millerand  in  France,  who  violated  the  party 
tactics  in  accepting  office  under  non-Socialist  minis- 
tries.2  A  recent  American  instance  illustrates  the 
discipline  on  a  small  scale.  A  Socialist  of  Lead, 
South  Dakota,  who  had  been  elected  to  the  office 
of  alderman,  violated  the  principle  of  working-class 
solidarity  in  consenting  to  act  as  strike-breaker. 
When  the  Socialist  Party  expelled  him,  presenting 
to  the  city  council  the  resignation  which,  according 
to  Socialist  custom,  he  had  filed  before  his  election, 
the  culprit  remained  loyal  to  the  recall,  and  refused 
to  remain  in  the  council  even  after  it  had  declined  to 
accept  his  resignation.^ 

There  are  three  avenues  of  political  power  open 
to  a  third  party  such  as  that  of  the  Socialists.    The 

*  Hillquit,  Hist,  of  Soc,  p.  325. 

*  See  Charles  Rappoport,  Die  Neue  Zeit,  quoted  in  N.  Y.  Call,  March 
10,  1910.  / 

*  Call,  March  8,  1910  (Hunter);  S.  P.  Off.  Bull.,  Feb.,  1910. 


OF  THE    PRESENT   DAY  213 

first  of  these,  the  method  of  temporary  fusion  with 
other  radical  parties,  was  followed  in  the  early  days 
of  the  Socialist  Labor  Party  at  such  times  as  it 
employed  the  franchise  at  all.  The  last  experiment 
in  this  line,  however,  that  of  the  New  York  fusion 
with  the  United  Labor  Party  in  1886,  proved  so 
unsatisfactory  that  since  that  time  the  American  So- 
cialists have  maintained  an  unconditional  hostility 
toward  political  compromise. 

The  second  mode  of  exercising  power  is  that  which 
has  been  forced  upon  the  German  Social  Democrats 
by  the  peculiar  conditions  of  their  government. 
While  they  constitute  numerically  the  largest  party 
in  the  Empire,  they  are  able  in  general  to  influence 
government  action  only  indirectly,  by  protesting 
against  the  evils  that  exist  and  extorting  favorable 
legislation  from  other  parties  by  the  display  of  their 
menacing  power.  It  is  well-known  that  Bismarck 
frankly  fought  Socialism  with  socialistic  measures, 
and  the  German  Socialists  maintain  that  It  is  the 
threat  of  their  growing  political  body  which  has 
brought  about  the  advanced  labor  legislation  of 
recent  years. ^  Ever  since  the  practice  of  fusion  was 
repudiated  by  the  American  party,  this  policy  of 
power  through  menace  has  been  prominent.  Owing 
to  Its  insignificant  numbers  until  recently,  the  party 
has  existed  as  little  more  than  an  organization  of 
protest,  but  the  growth  of  this  protest  has,  according 
to  its  advocates,  been  of  some  effect  in  forcing  radi- 
cal measures  Into  the  platforms  of  the  older  parties. 

During  this  period  "  No  Compromise "  has 
marked  the  attitude  of  American  Socialists.  The 
members  and  local  organizations  are  prohibited  from 

*  Soc.  Campaign  Book,  1908,  Hunter,  p.  113,  ff.;  Debs,  p.  6,     ' 


214  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

voting  for  or  aiding  in  the  election  of  any  candidate 
of  another  party,  from  refraining  to  nominate  in 
order  to  favor  other  candidates,  from  accepting  ap- 
pointive offices  from  other  parties,  and  from  even 
temporary  fusion.^ 

The  sentiment  of  the  rank  and  file  is  expressed 
by  the  following: 

"  Everything  and  everybody  connected  with  the 
democratic  party  is  an  enemy  of  Socialism,  and 
therefore  a  political  enemy  of  every  Socialist.  For 
a  Socialist  to  take  part  in  the  affairs  of  the  demo- 
cratic or  republican  party  is  nothing  less  than  trea- 
son. Every  person  who  becomes  a  member  of  a 
Socialist  party  local  signs  a  pledge  to  the  effect  that 
he  severs  all  relations  with  all  other  parties  and 
henceforth  will  support  the  Socialist  party,  and  the 
Socialist  party  alone.  The  only  way  for  a  party 
member  to  relieve  himself  from  the  obligation  of 
this  pledge  is  to  withdraw  from  the  party;  but  if 
he  violates  the  pledge  while  retaining  membership, 
it  becomes  the  duty  of  the  local  to  expel  him.  .  .  . 
Remember  the  Socialist  slogan:  'No  compromise, 
no  political  trading.'  "  ^ 

It  is  of  interest  to  note  that,  while  the  pledge 
of  the  Socialist  Party  is  not  a  promise  for  the  future, 
but  a  declaration  of  present  independence  of  other 
political  parties,  the  Socialist  Labor  Party  exacts  a 
promise  that  the  candidate  "  will  never "  cast  a 
ballot  elsewhere.^  As  has  already  been  mentioned, 
the  penalty  of  expulsion  is  in  both  parties   freely 

*  S.  p.  Nat.  Const.,  Art.  xii.  Sec.  3. 

*  Appeal  to  Reason,  Mar.  3,  1907. 

»  Prin.  of  S.  L.  P.;  Const,  of  S.  L.  P.,  Art.  2,  Sec.  5. 


OF  THE    PRESENT  DAY  215 

applied  to  all  violations  of  the  No  Compromise 
principle. 

During  the  stage  in  which  the  policy  of  protest 
is  dominant,  there  are  few  points  at  which  parlia- 
mentary tactics  may  be  said  to  appear,  and  ques- 
tions of  procedure  arise  chiefly  with  regard  to  the 
internal  organization  and  principles  as  previously 
outlined.  There  is  a  third  means  of  power,  however, 
which  must  eventually  be  reached  by  any  successful 
Socialist  party,  —  the  method  of  direct  participation 
in  the  government.  In  most  European  countries, 
and  especially  in  Germany,  the  Socialists  have  for 
years  engaged  in  parliamentary  activity,  and  in 
France  they  have  secured  actual  control  of  several 
municipalities.  While  in  general  the  rigid  prohibi- 
tion of  compromise  has  remained  characteristic  of 
Socialism,  it  has  been  unavoidable  that,  in  this  de- 
velopment of  parliamentary  and  executive  action, 
a  gradual  shifting  of  opinion  has  taken  place  as  to 
what  constitutes  compromise. 

Tn  the  early  days  of  the  German  movement,  the 
wisdom  of  even  entering  Parliament  was  questioned, 
and  participation  in  any  parliamentary  activity  be- 
yond that  of  protest  was  considered  compromise. 
Until  the  late  nineties  it  was  deemed  compromise 
to  use  the  franchise  at  all  under  the  iniquitous  elec- 
toral systems  of  various  German  states. '^  To  vote 
in  favor  of  the  imperialistic  budget  is  still  accounted 
compromise,  and  the  vice-presidency  of  the  Reich- 
stag is  unclaimed  by  the  Socialists  because  of  the 
perfunctory  duties  attached  thereto  which  would  in- 
volve a  sanction  of  the  present  government.^ 

*  Skelton,  op.  cit.  p.  234. 

•  Kampffmeyer,  op.  cit.  p.  37-78. 


2i6  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

In  spite  of  their  general  attitude  of  protest,  how- 
ever, the  German  Socialists  have  long  made  use  of 
parliamentary  methods  in  securing  legislation  for 
the  benefit  of  the  working  class. ^  The  International 
Congress  at  Paris  in  1900  declared  that  under  cer- 
tain circumstances  the  experiment  of  the  entry  of  a 
Socialist  fepresentative  into  a  bourgeois  ministry 
might  be  allowed  "  as  a  temporary  and  exceptional 
makeshift,"  only,  however,  when  approved  by  the 
whole  party  organization.^  Even  W.  E.  Walling, 
a  "  revolutionist "  in  the  American  party,  admits  the 
possible  advantage  of  compromise  when  great  and 
immediate  benefit  to  the  workers  may  be  obtained 
thereby.^ 

Perhaps  the  clearest  statement  that  can  be  found 
of  the  present  definition  of  compromise  among 
Marxians  is  that  of  Kautsky: 

"  What  is  opposed  is  the  idea  of  the  possibility 
that  a  proletarian  party  can  during  normal  times 
regularly  combine  with  a  capitalist  party  for  the  pur- 
pose of  maintaining  a  government  or  a  government 
party,  without  being  destroyed  by  the  insuperable 
conflicts  which  must  exist."  * 

The  following  instructions  given  to  the  national 
organizers  of  the  American  Socialist  Party  show 
a  definite  application  of  the  principle: 

**  Show  the  necessity  for  avoiding  alliances  or  fu- 
sions, direct  or  indirect,  through  individuals,  locals, 
or  states,  with  any  other  political  organization."  ** 

*  Liebknecht,  No  Compromise,  p.  31,  52. 

*  See  ibid.  p.  58.  Chas.  Rappoport  in  N.  Y.  Call,  March  10,  1910. 
«  N.  Y.  Call,  Nov.  7,  1909. 

*  Road  to  Power,  p.  11. 

*  Weekly  Bulletin,  June  II,  1908. 


OF   THE    PRESENT   DAY  217 

The  only  extensive  opportunity  for  parliamenta- 
rism among  American  Socialists  exists  in  the  Wiscon- 
sin legislature  and  the  Milwaukee  city  government, 
and,  while  factions  opposed  to  "  the  Wisconsin 
movement  "  have  always  been  ready  to  accuse  the 
Socialists  in  that  state  of  fusion  and  other  violations 
of  the  party  constitution,  such  charges  have  been 
emphatically  denied,  and  never  substantiated.^  The 
rigid  position  in  which  the  Wisconsin  Socialists  are 
held  by  the  national  constitution  may  be  regarded 
as  a  source  either  of  strength  or  of  weakness.  On 
the  one  hand,  the  Socialists  are  forced  into  an  atti- 
tude of  opposition  to  the  reform  forces  led  by  Sena- 
tor La  Follette,  with  many  of  whose  principles  they 
are  in  hearty  agreement,  and  united  with  whom  they 
might  exert  appreciable  influence  upon  national  poli- 
tics. On  the  other  hand,  their  very  rigidity  has 
saved  them  from  absorption  In  the  fluctuating  for- 
tunes of  the  radicals,  and  has  doubtless  been  an  im- 
portant factor  in  raising  them  so  far  above  suspicion 
of  collusion  that  the  city  of  Milwaukee  surrendered 
itself  to  their  untried  power  rather  than  to  either 
of  the  corrupted  older  parties. 

It  is  evident,  however,  that  as  soon  as  the  So- 
cialists In  each  country  pass  from  the  condition  of 
a  cult  to  that  of  a  party,  the  matter  of  compromise 
tends  to  be  interpreted  more  and  more  liberally. 
Though  the  Wisconsin  legislators  may  adhere  strictly 
to  the  terms  of  the  same  national  constitution  that 
governs  the  New  York  party  of  protest,  the  former 
are  gaining  a  practical  experience  In  methods  which 
to  the  New  York  Marxist  are  a  synonym  for  com- 
promise and  opportunism.    The  Socialist  administra- 

*  Weekly  Bulletin,  June  i8,  1907. 


21 8  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

tion  of  Milwaukee  had  hardly  entered  upon  its  du- 
ties before  it  became  the  object  of  sharp  criticism 
from  the  party  "  revolutionists  " ;  and  the  degree  of 
success  with  which  this  administration  is  attended 
will  undoubtedy  exercise  great  influence  upon  the  idea 
of  "  compromise  "  as  held  in  the  American  party.^ 

Although  its  limited  scope  and  its  subordination 
to  state  regulations  preclude  the  Milwaukee  govern- 
ment from  being  considered  a  type  of  Socialism,  yet 
the  working  out  of  its  problems  cannot  fail  to  fur- 
nish a  valuable  experiment  in  Socialist  administra- 
tion. While  the  success  was  won  with  the  aid  of 
non-Socialist  elements,  the  issue  of  Socialism  was 
in  no  sense  obscured,  and  the  city  government  entered 
upon  its  duties  with  no  entangling  associations  other 
than  the  characteristically  Socialist  alliance  with  or- 
ganized labor.  It  has  unconditionally  repudiated  the 
spoils  system,  but  differs  from  reform  parties  in  its 
open  partisanship.  Whether  or  not  it  will  be  able 
to  combine  honesty  and  efficiency  with  the  principles 
of  championship  of  the  working  class  and  subor- 
dination to  the  rigid  national  constitution  of  revolu- 
tionary Socialism  is  a  question  fraught  with  great 
consequence  for  the  movement.^ 

In  the  controversy  as  to  compromise,  it  is  un- 
avoidable that  the  authority  of  Marxism  should  be 
used  by  both  sides.  Those  who  differ  from  the  par- 
liamentarians point  to  the  inconsistency  of  their 
methods  with  the  doctrine  of  class  struggle,  asking, — 

"  What  is  the  difference  between  the  concord  that 
is  now  proposed  with  the  reformers  on  the  question 
of  workingmen's  insurance,  etc.,  on  the  political  field, 

»  See  Rose  Pastor  Stokes,  N.  Y.  Call,  May  14,  1910. 

'  See  Seidel's  Inaug.  Speech,  Social  Dem.  Herald,  Apr.  23,  1910. 


OF  THE    PRESENT  DAY  219 

and  the  concord  that  is  already  carried  out  by  the 
Civic  Federation  on  the  economic  field?  "  ^ 

They  quote  the  typical  Marxist,  Wilhelm  Liebknecht, 
in  his  denunciation  of  compromise  and  political 
trading.^ 

The  Wisconsin  legislators  and  their  sympathizers, 
on  the  other  hand,  draw  attention  to  the  recom- 
mendation of  the  Communist  Manifesto  for  the 
Communists  to  support  the  radical  parties  in  their 
respective  countries,^  and  to  the  opportunistic  char- 
acter of  Marx's  organization,  the  International. 

"  It  was  Marx,"  says  Spargo,  "  who  arranged  that 
the  trades  unions  of  Great  Britain  should  cooperate 
with  such  bitter  enemies  of  ordinary  trades  union 
policies  as  Bright  and  Cobden  in  rousing  the  public 
opinion  of  Great  Britain  to  the  support  of  President 
Lincoln  and  the  Union  cause.  ...  It  was  Marx,  too, 
who,  in  the  same  way,  brought  about  the  cooperation 
of  all  the  radical  forces  in  the  struggle  for  franchise 
reform  a  few  years  later."  ^ 

The  American  constructivists  note  also  the  gradual 
change  of  tactics  on  the  part  of  the  German  succes- 
sors of  Marx,  and  look  to  the  German  Social- 
Democracy  as  their  guide  in  matters  of  practice.^ 

In  direct  contrast  to  the  Wisconsin  Socialists  must 
be  placed  the  advocates  of  "  revolutionism  "  and  of 
"  direct  action  "  previously  mentioned,  in  whose  opin- 
ion, quoting  Mr.  Walling  once  more, 

1  Walling,  in  Call,  Mar.  22,  1910. 

*  No.  Comp.,  p.  17,  seq. 

'  Hillquit,  History  of  Socialism,  p.  178;  Communist  Manifesto,  p.  45; 
J.  Keir  Hardie,  in  N.  Y.  Call,  Feb.  20,  1908. 

*  Spargo,  Sidelights,  etc.,  p.  144. 

'  Thompson,  op.  cit.,  p.  6;  Gaylord,  preface  to  translation  of 
Kampffmeyer,  op.  cit.,  p.  5. 


220  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

"  these  petty  reforms  never  have  and  never  will 
arouse  the  enthusiasm  of  the  working  class  and  do 
not  even  perfnit  of  its  cooperation,  but  leave  every- 
thing in  the  hands  of  a  few  self-appointed  leaders^  ^ 

The  varying  shades  of  Socialist  opinion  regarding 
the  fall  of  the  capitalist  system  are  closely  asso- 
ciated with  the  corresponding  shades  of  tactical  dif- 
ference. To  the  revolutionist,  looking  for  an  auto- 
matic socialization  of  capital,  an  improvement  of 
labor  conditions  through  industrial  unionism,  and  a 
final  decisive  struggle  for  proletarian  victory,  the 
slow  winning  of  votes  and  passing  of  bills  appear 
trivial,  and  the  slightest  halt  of  the  revolutionary 
column  is  considered  compromise.  The  constructiv- 
ist,  on  the  contrary,  believes  that,  since  the  path  to 
Socialism  must  be  won  step  by  step  through  conscious 
political  action,  every  vote  that  adds  to  the  power 
of  the  working  class  and  every  bill  that  tends  to 
improve  their  condition  is  not  only  an  immediate 
advantage  but  an  advance,  even  though  slight,  in 
the  direction  of  the  Socialist  commonwealth.  The 
contrast  between  these  two  groups,  representing  the 
extremes  of  Socialist  tactics,  brings  us  to  the 
consideration  of  the  divisions  in  the  American 
movement. 

»  N.  Y.  Call,  Mar.  22,  1910. 


CHAPTER   XIV 

THE   DIVISIONS    AMONG   AMERICAN    SOCIALISTS 

If  we  exclude  the  various  types  of  non-party  sym- 
pathizers that  cluster  about  the  American  Socialist 
parties,  we  find  that  such  lines  of  cleavage  as  exist 
are  seldom  sufficiently  distinct  to  warrant  the  division 
of  American  Socialists  into  several  "  varieties." 
The  Socialist  Labor  Party,  to  be  sure,  is  an  organi- 
zation separate  from  and  antagonistic  to  the  Socialist 
Party,  but  the  differences  are  largely  personal,  and 
the  policy  of  the  former  can  be  distinguished  but 
slightly  from  that  of  the  "  revolutionary  "  wing  of 
the  latter. 

The  Socialist  Party  is  divided  neither  into  two 
opposing  camps  nor  into  a  number  of  warring  fac- 
tions, as  is  shown  by  the  unanimity  with  which  all 
groups  cooperate  in  such  enterprises  as  the  party 
press,  a  contest  for  free  speech,  or  a  labor  conflict.^ 
There  is,  rather,  a  gradual  shading  from  the  revolu- 
tionists on  the  left  to  the  constructivists  on  the  right, 
through  groups  whose  characteristics  are  seldom 
exact  and  always  changing,  but  whose  members  in- 
dulge in  frequent  and  vigorous  mutual  criticism. 
Sometimes  following  the  tactical  differences  and 
sometimes  running  counter  to  them  are  divisions  as 

»  See  list  of  The  Call  Weekly  Pledge  Fund,  N.  Y.  Call,  Mar.  23,  19 10. 


222  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

to  doctrine,  social  class,  attitude  toward  religion,  and 
policy  as  to  the  organization  of  labor. 

Most  fundamental,  but  of  slight  practical  impor- 
tance, is  the  distinction  formerly  alluded  to  between 
the  Marxist  and  the  Revisionist.  It  is  true  that,  in 
the  broad  meaning  of  the  term,  Revisionist  is  prac- 
tically synonymous  with  constructivist ;  there  is  a  con- 
venient and  limited  sense,  however,  in  which  "  Re- 
visionist "  is  applied  to  those  Socialists  who  de- 
mand a  revision  of  Marx's  theories  as  inconsistent 
with  modern  economic  science  and  the  facts  of  in- 
dustrial development.  While  in  Europe  there  have 
been  serious  controversies  between  such  opponents 
as  Bernstein  and  Kautsky,  America  has  produced  so 
far  no  Revisionists  in  the  sense  of  independent  re- 
visers of  the  Marxian  theories.^  Revisionist  con- 
clusions have  been  adopted  to  a  limited  extent  by 
Spargo  and  the  younger  writers,  but  we  see  in  this 
country  few  of  the  constructivists  bestowing  atten- 
tion upon  revisionist  theories  as  such.  The  extreme 
right  are  characterized  by  either  ignoring  the  Marx- 
ian theories  or  amplifying  them  by  an  application  to 
modern  society,  as  in  the  works  of  Hillquit,  Spargo, 
and  Ghent.^  The  American  movement  contains,  on 
the  other  hand,  strong  Marxian  apologists,  among 
whom  are  Sanial,  Untermann,  Boudin,  and  La 
Monte.  Mr.  Boudin  attacks  with  vigor  the  disre- 
gard of  theory  in  the  American  movement,  main- 
taining that,  while 

"  Our  intelligent  opponents  are  studying  the  Socialist 
classics  with  avidity,  ...  it  seems  to  have  been  left 

^  Kautsky,  Road  to  Power,  p.  34-3S;    Bernstein  und  das  Soc.  Prog., 
p.  I,  seq. 

*  Spargo,  Socialism,  p.  102. 


OF  THE    PRESENT  DAY  223 

to  the  Socialist  Party  of  America  to  go  our  former 
ignorant  opponents  one  better  by  teaching  Socialism 
without  taking  the  trouble  of  studying  and  under- 
standing it." 

The  strict  Marxists  are  usually  revolutionists  of 
one  type  or  another,  claiming  that  the  consistent 
application  of  the  principles  of  the  class  struggle, 
the  materialistic  conception  of  history,  and  the  catas- 
trophe of  capitalism,  leads  only  to  the  revolutionary 
position. 

The  attitude  of  the  opposite  wing  is  shown  by 
Victor  Berger  of  Wisconsin,  and  by  Senator  Gay- 
lord  of  the  same  state,  who  writes: 

"  Judging  Marx  by  what  happened  during  his 
life,  I  have  a  strong  suspicion  that  he  might  have 
changed  his  mind  a  little  by  this  time.  .  .  .  More- 
over, the  practical  problem  of  the  social  ownership 
and  control  of  social  utilities  will  not  depend  for  its 
solution  upon  whether  or  not  some  debatable  points 
in  a  certain  book  can  be  substantiated." 

The  Christian  Socialists  are  not  a  faction,  and 
do  not  embrace  any  different  variety  of  Socialism 
from  that  of  the  party  at  large. ^  We  have  seen, 
however,  that  there  exists  a  strong  tendency  towards 
atheism  in  the  ranks  of  the  Socialists,  which  is 
fostered  by  an  exaggerated  interpretation  of  eco- 
nomic determinism  and  by  the  known  opposition  to 
the  church  on  the  part  of  the  early  Marxians.  The 
revolutionist  spirit,  also,  frequently  finds  itself  op- 
posed to  the  Christian  Socialists  in  their  desire  to 
base  the  movement  upon  the  brotherhood  of  man 
rather  than  the  interest  of  a  class.    Thus  we  see  the 

*  The  Christian  Socialist,  June  15,  1907. 


224  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

Christian  Socialists  often  identified  with  the  con- 
structivists  and  Revisionists,  this  connection  being 
emphasized  by  their  opponents.  Such  an  antago- 
nism appeared  in  Nebraska  in  1907,  when  the  Chris- 
tian Socialist  faction  in  that  state  was  supported  by 
Carl  Thompson  of  Wisconsin,  who  was  in  turn  at- 
tacked by  the  "  revolutionists  "  of  Washington.^  It 
is  rare  at  present,  however,  that  a  Socialist  writer 
declares,  with  A.  M.  Lewis,  that  Christianity  is 
incompatible  with  economic  materialism,  and  Spargo 
and  Work  are  emphatic  in  declaring  the  essential 
idealism  of  the  Socialist  philosophy.^ 

The  alignment  of  Socialists  as  to  social  classes  is 
most  elusive,  and  has  been  greatly  exaggerated.  On 
the  one  hand  are  the  proletarians,  properly  including 
all  non-capitalist  workers,  but  often  interpreted  as 
merely  the  skilled  and  unskilled  manual  laborers; 
on  the  other  are  the  "  parlor  Socialist,"  or  convert 
from  the  bourgeois  class,  and  the  "  intellectual,"  or 
educated  mental  worker.  The  evidence  for  the  sup- 
posed antagonism  between  the  two  is  derived  from 
such  controversies  as  the  one  previously  referred  to 
between  the  New  York  Call  and  W.  J.  Ghent,  and 
from  such  referendums  as  those  recently  submitted 
to  the  party  directing  that  the  occupation  of  every 
candidate  for  the  National  Executive  Committee  be 
printed  on  the  ballot  and  debarring  any  editor  or 
publisher  of  a  newspaper  from  occupying  a  national 
office.^  While  the  former  referendum  was  passed 
and  now  belongs  to  the  procedure  of  the  Socialist 
Party,  the  latter  was  defeated  by  a  large  majority, 

»  Weekly  Bulletin,  Aug.  22,  1907;  Oct.  10,  1907;  July  28,  1908. 
•  Lewis,   Evolution  and   Social   Science,  p.  4;  Work,  p.  83;  Spargo, 
Spiritual  Significance  of  Socialism,  p.  18,  91. 
»  S.  P.  Official  Bulletin,  Oct.,  1909. 


OF  THE    PRESENT  DAY,  225 

showing  that  the  working-class  rank  and  file  are  in 
reality  influenced  but  little  by  the  anti-intellectual 
movement.^  The  laborer  takes  no  part  in  the  dis- 
pute, says  a  correspondent  of  the  Call, 

"  being  defended  as  usual  by  sympathetic  comrades 
from  their  offices  and  studios.  ...  So  far  as  I 
can  learn,  he  takes  no  interest  whatever  in  the  dis- 
cussion, but  is  found  plodding  along  doing  his  work 
as  he  sees  it,  and,  strangest  of  all,  wherever  there 
is  work  to  be  done  requiring  brains,  he  immediately 
puts  a  comrade  on  the  job  having  the  required 
qualifications."  ^ 

As  antagonistic  factions  in  the  Socialist  Party  the 
two  divisions  do  not  exist;  any  classification  along 
lines  of  policy  always  includes  both  intellectual  and 
manual  workers,  members  of  the  proletarian  and 
middle  classes.  It  is  generally  true,  however,  that, 
other  things  being  equal,  advantages  in  education 
and  opportunity  tend  to  liberality  rather  than  to 
extremism,  and  that  the  cultured  members  of  the 
Socialist  Party,  removed  as  they  are  from  conditions 
of  oppression,  are  prone  to  look  with  greater  tolera- 
tion upon  Revisionism  and  the  slow  policies  of  re- 
form than  does  the  laborer  on  the  firing  line  of  the 
industrial  struggle.  The  Christian  Socialists,  too,  are 
naturally  drawn  to  a  large  extent  from  the  con- 
gregations of  the  more  liberal  Protestant  churches, 
representing  the  educated  native  middle  class,  rather 
than  from  the  working  classes  to  whom  religion  and 
radicalism  come,  as  a  rule,  in  forms  opposed  to  one 
another. 

1  S.  P.  Official  Bulletin,  Feb.,  1909. 
«  N.  Y.  Call,  Dec.  16,  1909. 


226  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

We  accordingly  find  Ernest  Untermann,  although 
an  "  intellectual,"  proclaiming  himself  a  proletarian 
and  a  non-Christian  with  the  implication  that  the  two 
are  synonymous;  and  the  Washington  committeeman 
Herman  identifies  proletarianism  with  revolution  in 
the  question,  "  Shall  we  have  a  revolutionary 
proletarian  party  or  a  reform  bourgeois  party  in 
Nebraska?  "1 

While  the  controversy  that  recently  threatened 
serious  dissension  in  the  Sociahst  Party  centers  chiefly 
around  the  question  of  labor  organization,  it  has 
not  been  unconnected  with  the  "  proletarian-intel- 
lectual "  discussion.  Owing  to  the  fact  that  the 
members  of  the  1909  National  Executive  Committee, 
representing  in  general  one  side  of  the  labor  contro- 
versy, were  nearly  all  mental  workers,  the  opposition 
has  demanded  emphatically  the  representation  of 
manual  laborers  on  this  committee.  Although  this 
demand  has  met  with  general  acceptance  by  the  party, 
including  the  members  of  the  committee  in  question, 
it  has  been  the  occasion  of  somewhat  bitter  dispute, 
giving  rise  to  the  referendum  previously  mentioned 
which  aimed  to  exclude  editors  and  publishers  of 
newspapers  from  national  office.^ 

Since  modesty  usually  forbids  a  man's  confessing 
himself  an  *'  intellectual,"  and  since  the  genuine 
manual  laborer  is  seldom  able  to  express  himself  by 
means  of  the  press  and  the  lecture  platform,  we 
have  among  American  Socialists  the  rather  absurd 
spectacle  of  certain  writers  and  lecturers  more  or 
less  educated  dubbing  one  another  "  intellectuals," 

1  Weekly  Bulletin,  Nov.  2,  1907;  July  28,  1909. 
'  See  Simons'  letter,  in  Int.  See.  Rev.,  Jan.,_i9l0,  p.  594,  j^g.,  and 
Call  Editorial,  Nov.  7,  1909. 


OF  THE    PRESENT  DAY  227 

and  either  hurling  back  the  epithet  or  risking  the 
still  more  unpleasant  designation  of  "  self-styled 
Intellectual." 

Antl-Intellectualism,  however,  Is  not  peculiar  to 
the  American  party,  but,  as  Spargo  has  pointed  out, 
has  appeared  In  every  country  In  the  formative  stage 
of  the  Socialist  movement,  furnishing  the  basis  more 
than  once  for  bitter  opposition  to  the  leaders  Marx 
and  Engels.  The  most  active  and  prominent  of  the 
anti-Intellectuallsts,  says  Spargo,  can  practically  with- 
out exception 

"  be  Included  In  one  of  two  classes.  Almost  to  a 
man,  they  were  either  empty-headed  Utopians,  men 
with  schemes  for  the  speedy  salvation  of  mankind, 
such  as  '  free  credit,'  universal  languages,  and  the 
like,  or  they  were  men  whose  overwhelming  desire 
for  personal  gain  or  power  led  them  into  the  lowest 
depths  of  treachery  and  deceit."  ^ 

Spargo  represents  the  sentiment  of  the  majority 
of  American  Socialists,  both  working  and  middle 
class.  In  the  following: 

"  Any  attempt  to  limit  the  influence  and  work 
of  any  number  of  honest  and  sincere  Socialists, 
simply  because  they  are  not  manual  laborers,  must  of 
necessity  be  mischievous  and  Injurious  to  the  move- 
ment. This  is  a  working-class  movement  primarily, 
and  no  conspiracy  can  change  that  essential  charac- 
teristic. But  to  attempt  to  exclude  from  active  par- 
ticipation In  it  all  who  are  not  manual  laborers  Is 
either  the  counsel  of  fools  or  of  traitors.  If  such 
an  attempt  were  to  succeed  It  would  doom  the  move- 
ment to  defeat.     A  working-class  movement  which 

*  Spargo,  Sidelights,  etc.,  p.  102-103. 


228  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

deliberately  refused  to  avail  itself  of  all  the  gifts 
of  intellect  and  education  at  its  command,  would  be 
doomed  to  pursue  forever  the  futile  task  of  plowing 
sand."  ^ 

While  differences  as  to  Marxian  doctrine,  religion, 
and  social  class  must  exist  in  the  Socialism  of  every 
country,  the  problem  of  labor  organization  as  it  now 
confronts  American  Socialists  is  distinctive.  An  ac- 
count has  already  been  given  of  the  general  support 
given  to  all  labor  unions,  of  the  hostility  of  the 
American  Federation  of  Labor  to  the  Socialist  par- 
ties, and  of  the  alliance  of  the  former  through  its 
leaders  with  the  American  Civic  Federation.  Allu- 
sion was  made  to  the  Socialist  labor  unions  in  the 
West  and  to  the  rise  and  decadence  of  the  Industrial 
Workers  of  the  World.  It  is  coming  to  be  believed 
by  many  Socialists  that  the  old  craft  organizations, 
uniting  as  they  do  members  of  the  same  craft  in 
various  industries,  tend  toward  the  formation  of 
labor  aristocracies,  encourage  jurisdictional  disputes, 
and  hinder  such  mass  action  as  is  required  in  large 
strikes.  Division  into  crafts,  moreover,  being  based 
largely  on  differences  in  tools,  is  inapplicable  to  the 
modern  industry  in  which  tools,  in  the  strict  sense 
of  the  word,  are  not  used.  The  industrial  union, 
on  the  other  hand,  by  which  all  the  trades  or  crafts 
in  an  industry  are  united,  gives  great  tactical  advan- 
tages. Instead  of  relying  upon  a  full  treasury  and 
the  ability  to  stand  a  protracted  strike,  it  places  its 
dependence  on  the  strike  that  is  short  but  wide- 
spread, thus  working  toward  the  Socialist  ideal  of 
labor  solidarity.    This  type  of  organization  is  usually 

*  Spargo,  Sidelights,  etc.,  p.  105-106. 


OF  THE   PRESENT  DAY  229 

associated  with  declared  Socialist  principles,  with  re- 
fusal to  enter  into  contracts  or  alliances  with  em- 
ployers, and  with  a  generally  militant  attitude.  The 
preamble  of  the  Industrial  Workers  of  the  World 
tells  the  laborer: 

"  Instead  of  the  conservative  motto,  '  A  fair  day's 
wages  for  a  fair  day's  work,'  we  must  inscribe  on 
our  banner  the  revolutionary  watchword,  '  Abolition 
of  the  wage  system.'  "  ^ 

The  American  Federation  is  based  on  the  trade 
or  craft  organization,  and,  while  the  industrial  form 
appears  at  times,  as  in  the  United  Mine  Workers, 
there  is  an  absence  of  the  militant  Socialist  features 
which  Wm.  Haywood,  of  the  Western  Federation  of 
Miners,  terms  essential  to  industrialism.  While  Ben 
Hanford  was  an  upholder  of  craft  unionism  and  the 
American  Federation,  Eugene  V.  Debs  has  always 
fought  for  the  industrial  organization,  and  is  fol- 
lowed in  this  advocacy  by  most  of  the  younger  So- 
cialists. While  a  local  here  and  there,  however, 
sometimes  tries  to  pass  a  national  resolution  declar- 
ing for  industrial  unionism,  the  bulk  of  the  Socialist 
Party  have  decided  to  remain  neutral  in  the  matter, 
supporting  all  labor  unions  without  interference  with 
their  internal  organization,  and  continuing  to  spread 
propaganda  among  them  as  the  natural  recruiting- 
ground  for  Socialism.  The  party  has  expressed  its 
official  attitude  as  follows: 

"  The  Socialist  Party  does  not  seek  to  dictate  to 
organized  labor  in  matters  of  internal  organization 
and  union  policy.  It  recognizes  the  necessary  au- 
tonomy of  the  union  movement   on   the   economic 

*  Int.  Soc.  Rev.  Advertising  Pages,  Feb.,  19  lO. 


230  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

field,  as  it  insists  on  maintaining  its  own  autonomy 
on  the  political  field.  It  is  confident  that  in  the 
school  of  experience  organized  labor  will  as  rapidly 
as  possible  develop  the  most  effective  forms  of  or- 
ganization and  methods  of  action.  The  Socialist 
Party  stands  with  organized  labor  in  all  its  struggles 
to  resist  capitalist  aggression  or  to  wrest  from  the 
capitalists  any  improvement  in  the  conditions  of 
labor."  1 

"  We  do  not  ask  any  trade  union  to  endorse  the 
Socialist  Party.  Party  politics  is  not  within  the  scope 
of  the  trade  union.  On  the  other  hand,  we  must 
make  the  trade  unionist  constantly  feel  that  the  So- 
cialist Party  is  the  political  complement  —  the  other 
half — of  the  economic  organization."  ^ 

Although  the  matter  of  labor  organization  appears 
at  first  sight  outside  the  field  of  Socialist  discussion, 
upon  it  depends  an  Important  question  of  American 
tactics,  —  namely,  the  attitude  of  the  Socialist  Party 
toward  the  formation  of  a  Labor  Party  on  the  lines 
of  that  In  England. 

The  situation  is  thus  outlined  by  Karl  Kautsky: 

"  One  can  distinguish  two  principal  types  of  move- 
ments for  the  attainment  of  an  all-embracing  So- 
cialist class  party:  the  European  continental  type, 
which  is  best  illustrated  at  present  in  the  German 
Social-Democracy,  and  the  Anglo-Saxon  type,  which 
can  best  be  studied  in  England,  but  which  is  also 
strikingly  developed  in  North  America  and  in  Aus- 
tralia. ...  In  continental  Europe  the  political  or- 
ganization of  the  proletariat  developed  before  their 

'  Address  to  Organized  Labor  of  National  Convention,  S.  P.  Official 
Bulletin,  Jan.,  1910. 

*  Address  of  National  Executive  Committee,  Bulletin,  Jan.,  1910. 


OF  THE    PRESENT  DAY  231 

trade  union  organization;  they  have,  therefore,  the 
sooner  formed  a  mass  party  under  the  Socialist 
flag."  ' 

In  England,  however,  the  trade  unions  were  the 
first  to  develop, 

"  and  a  separate  political  party  seemed  quite  super- 
fluous, since  no  obstacle  hindered  their  political 
activity  in  England.  Under  these  conditions  it  was 
only  possible  to  form  a  separate  working  class  party 
by  amalgamating  the  trade  unions  into  a  common 
political  organization  and  to  permeate  it  with  the 
Socialist  spirit. 

"  This  was  also  the  opinion  of  Karl  Marx,  who 
was  so  influenced  by  the  English  conditions  that  he 
propagated  a  similar  development  in  continental 
Europe."  ^ 

Kautsky  goes  on  to  explain  that  the  Marxist  So- 
cial Democratic  Party  of  England  need  not  consider 
the  Labor  Party  as  a  rival,  but  should,  on  the  con- 
trary, enter  into  affiliation  with  it. 

He  finally  applies  the  case  to  the  American  So- 
cialists as  follows: 

"  In  North  America  things  are  somewhat  different 
from  those  obtaining  In  England.  Still,  there  is 
some  similarity,  and  it  is  possible  that  there,  too,  the 
long  wished  for  mass  party  of  the  proletariat  may 
be  formed  into  an  independent  political  party  in  the 
very  near  future  by  the  constitution  of  the  American 
Federation  of  Labor.  Probably  this  new  party  will 
not  be  a  definitely  Socialist  one  at  first,  and  the  So- 
slalist  Party  will,  therefore,  have  to  exist  side  by 

»  N.  Y.  Call,  Mar.  6,  1910. 


232  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

side  with  it  until  the  trade  union  party  has  been 
fully  won  for  Social  Democracy.  As  in  England, 
so  in  the  United  States.  The  chief  sphere  of  the 
Labor  party  will  be  parliamentary  and  electoral, 
while  that  of  the  Social  Democracy  will  be  theoretical 
and  propagandist. 

"  Attempts  have  been  made  in  this  direction,  and 
we  must  be  prepared  one  fine  day  to  see  the  rise 
of  such  a  Labor  party  side  by  side  with  the  Socialist 
Party  in  the  United  States,  and  demanding  admission 
to  the  International. 

"  And  here  I  am  of  the  opinion  that  what  holds 
for  the  British  will  also  hold  for  the  American 
Labor  party.  .  .  . 

"  The  ideal  organization  is  the  unification  of  all 
proletarian  parties,  the  political  societies,  the  trade 
unions,  the  cooperatives,  as  equal  members,  not  of 
a  labor  party  without  a  program,  as  is  at  present  the 
case  in  England,  but  of  a  class-conscious,  all-embrac- 
ing Social  Democracy."  ^ 

The  German  leader  is  doubtless  rather  too  ready 
to  parallel  the  English  and  American  conditions, 
making  too  little  allowance  for  the  peculiar  position 
of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor.  As  long  as 
this  body  remains  affiliated,  through  seven  out  of 
the  eleven  members  of  its  Executive  Council,  with 
the  Civic  Federation,  the  Socialist  Party  is  not  likely 
to  overcome  its  long-standing  suspicion.^  An  official 
utterance  voices  this  feeling: 

"  With  the  growing  strength  of  the  Socialist  Party 
endangering  the  battlements  of  capitalism  an  oppo- 

•      »  N.  Y.  Call,  Mar.  6,  1910. 

«  S.  P.  Off.  Bull.,  Jan.,  1910,  p.  3. 


OF  THE    PRESENT  DAY  233 

sition  and  conservative  labor  party  will  be  required 
by  the  Civic  Federation  and  the  interests  it  serves. 
When  it  is  needed  it  will  also  be  financed."  ^ 

There  is  a  considerable  Socialist  element  in  the 
American  Federation,  on  the  other  hand,  and  a 
generally  radical  tendency  is  shown  in  an  important 
section,  the  United  Mine  Workers,  in  its  recent  hos- 
tile action  toward  the  National  Civic  Federation. 
Certain  members  of  the  Socialist  Party,  notably 
A.  M.  Simons  and  Robert  Hunter  of  the  National 
Executive  Committee,  were  in  the  fall  of  1909  ap- 
parently preparing  for  a  campaign  to  bring  the  more 
radical  wing  of  the  Federation  into  closer  connection 
with  the  Socialists.^  A  letter  on  this  subject  written 
by  Mr.  Simons  to  Mr.  William  English  Walling,  a 
revolutionary  "  intellectual  "  Socialist  not  at  the  time 
a  member  of  the  party,  was  published  by  the  latter 
and  characterized  as  an  attempt  to  form  a  Labor 
Party  on  the  English  model.^  Not  only  Mr.  Simons, 
but  four  other  members  of  the  National  Executive 
Committee,  Robert  Hunter,  Morris  Hillquit,  John 
Spargo,  and  Victor  Berger,  were  charged  with  this 
project,  and  for  several  months  the  Socialist  press 
and  lecture  platform  rang  with  denunciations  of 
the  proposed  Labor  Party  on  the  one  hand  and 
denials  of  the  existence  of  such  a  proposition  on 
the  other. 

The  International  Socialist  Review,  at  present  the 
organ  of  the  revolutionary  Socialists,  published  in 
the  midst  of  the  dispute  a  series  of  letters  in  answer 
to  the  query. 


1  S.  P.  Off.  Bulletin,  Jan.,  1910,  p.  3. 
'  Int.  Soc.  Rev.,  Jan.,  1910,  p.  594,  leq. 


234  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

"  If  elected  to  the  National  Executive  Committee, 
will  you  favor  or  oppose  merging  the  Socialist  Party 
into  a  Labor  Party?  " 

The  answers  are  of  interest  as  showing  how  nearly 
the  cleavage  on  the  lines  of  the  proposed  party  coin- 
cides with  that  between  the  constructivists  and  the 
revolutionists,  to  be  mentioned  later  in  more  detail. 

Among  those  unconditionally  hostile  to  a  Labor 
Party  is  Eugene  V.  Debs,  who  writes, 

"  The  Socialist  Party  has  already  catered  far  too 
much  to  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  and  there 
is  no  doubt  that  a  halt  will  have  to  be  called.  ... 
If  the  trimmers  had  their  way,  we  should  degenerate 
into  mere  bourgeois  reform."  ^ 

The  Wisconsin  Socialists,  Berger  and  Thompson, 
urge  general  cooperation  between  the  labor  unions 
and  the  Socialist  Party;  J.  M.  Work  states  as  the 
mission  of  the  Socialist  Party  the  guidance  of  any 
future  Labor  Party  into  Socialist  channels;  and  Hill- 
quit,  Hunter,  and  Spargo,  while  expressing  various 
degrees  of  doubt  regarding  the  possibility  of  such  a 
party,  agree  that  the  question  of  Socialist  coopera- 
tion with  it  could  be  decided  only  after  careful  con? 
sideration  of  its  aims  and  methods.^ 

Although  the  controversy  brought  forth  some 
bitter  personalities  and  seemed  to  threaten  the  dis- 
ruption of  the  Socialist  Party,  it  came,  at  least  tem- 
porarily, to  a  peaceful  outcome,  in  the  election  of  the 
National  Executive  Committee  for  19 lo,  by  which 
the  so-called  "  labor-party "  majority  in  the  com- 
mittee of  seven  was  reduced  so  as  to  consist  of  but 

»  Int.  Soc.  Rev.,  Jan.,  1910,  p.  596,  seq. 
*  Ibid. 


OF  THE   PRESENT  DAY  235 

four,  three  members  who  had  emphatically  declared 
against  such  a  party,  Carey,  Goebel,  and  Lena  Mor- 
row Lewis,  being  seated  with  them. 

The  protracted  discussion  has  made  clear  several 
points.  First,  no  labor  party  project  is  yet  in  sight. 
A  Union  Labor  Party  indeed  has  existed  for  some 
time  in  California,  but  makes  no  promise  of  more 
than  state-wide  activity,  and  has  so  far  displayed 
no  leanings  toward  Socialist  affiliation.  It  is  impos- 
sible to  judge  at  present  what  will  be  the  outcome  of 
the  prevailing  tendency  toward  political  activity  on 
the  part  of  the  unions.  Second,  the  moderates  of  the 
Socialist  Party,  including  the  committee  members 
before  mentioned,  are  prepared  to  give  such  a 
possible  party  a  reception  according  to  its  merits. 
Third,  those  who  tend  to  the  revolutionary  position 
as  represented  by  the  International  Socialist  Review 
are  definitely  hostile  to  such  a  party,  on  the  grounds 
that  the  American  Federation  is  impossible  as  an 
ally,  that  political  cooperation  should  be  attempted 
only  with  those  industrial  unions  that  are  based  on 
the  declared  class  struggle,  and  that  the  English 
Labor  Party  is  unfit  as  a  model  for  efficiency.  These 
Socialists,  representing  the  active  minority,  follow 
the  English  Social  Democrats  in  maintaining  that 
the  Labor  Party  is  a  compromise  unworthy  of  Social- 
ism; and  the  leaders  of  the  two  English  bodies  them- 
selves have  been  drawn  into  the  dispute.  J.  Keir 
Hardie  and  J.  Ramsay  MacDonald  on  the  one  side 
and  H.  M.  Hyndman  on  the  other  have  contributed 
to  the  American  Socialist  press  mutually  antagonistic 
articles,  which  illustrate  very  definitely  the  inter- 
national character  of  Socialist  tactics.^ 

*  N.  Y.  Call,  Dec.  29,  1909,  Jan.  18,  1910,  Feb.  13  and  20,  1910. 


236  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

The  one  difference  of  opinion  among  American 
Socialists  that  is  of  permanent  significance  is  that 
regarding  methods,  the  main  points  of  which  have 
been  indicated  in  the  two  preceding  chapters;  and  it 
is  only  in  so  far  as  they  tend  to  group  themselves 
according  to  the  tactical  lines  of  cleavage  that  the 
minor  divisions  just  noted  are  worthy  of  attention. 

Throughout  these  pages  there  have  been  frequent 
references  to  the  groups  at  the  opposite  poles  of 
American  Socialism  as  "  revolutionists  "  and  "  con- 
structivists."  The  writer  is  fully  conscious  of  both 
the  inadequacy  of  the  terms  and  the  imperfection  of 
such  classifications  as  are  here  attempted;  names  are 
a  necessity  for  thought,  however,  and  among  the  cur- 
rent designations  these  appear  on  the  whole  to  be 
most  satisfactory.  Briefly,  the  revolutionist  is  the 
Socialist  who,  anticipating  the  fall  of  capitalism  by  a 
sudden  and  decisive  revolution,  would  leave  eco- 
nomic reforms  to  the  labor  unions  and  devote  the 
energies  of  the  party  solely  to  the  conquest  of  politi- 
cal rights  and  the  organization  of  the  proletariat 
against  the  day  of  conflict.  The  constructivist  is  the 
Socialist  who,  believing  that  the  Socialist  common- 
wealth will  be  ushered  in  gradually  by  deliberate 
action,  advocates  that  the  party  direct  its  immediate 
efforts,  wherever  practicable,  to  the  winning  of  elec- 
toral victories,  with  a  view  to  the  construction  of 
positive  steps  to  the  commonwealth  through  legisla- 
tive measures.^  As  exponents  of  either  view  in  its 
extreme  form  are  rare,  a  more  inclusive  classification 
of  American  Socialists  is  into  the  groups  of  left  and 
right. 

At  the  right,  frequently,  though  by  no  means  uni- 

*  Thompson  in  Int.  Soc.  Rev.,  July,  1905. 


OF  THE    PRESENT  DAY  237 

versally,  associated  with  a  refusal  to  emphasize 
dogma  and  a  tolerance  of  Revisionism,  with  a  wel- 
come to  the  Christian  Socialist  and  the  "  intellec- 
tual," with  friendliness  to  the  English  Labor  Party 
and  non-interference  with  methods  of  union  organi- 
zation, are  the  constructivists,  reformists,  or  moder- 
ates, termed  by  their  enemies  the  opportunists. 
These  are  represented  most  conspicuously  by  the 
Wisconsin  Socialists  Berger,  Thompson,  and  Gay- 
lord;  but  for  several  years  the  majority  of  the  Na- 
tional Executive  Committee,  including  Hillquit, 
Hunter,  Spargo,  Simons,  and  Work,  has  tended  to 
constructivism,  indicating  a  prevailing  national  sen- 
timent in  that  direction.  While  this  majority  was 
diminished  in  the  recent  election,  the  fact  that  the 
well-known  moderates.  Hunter,  Berger,  Hillquit, 
and  Spargo,  continued  to  receive  the  highest  prefer- 
ential vote  seems  to  point  to  the  influence  of  such 
special  questions  as  industrialism  and  "  proletarian- 
ism,"  rather  than  that  of  general  tactics,  in  deter- 
mining the  decrease.  In  general,  therefore,  the  pres- 
ent policy  of  the  national  Socialist  Party  may  be  said 
to  lean  toward  constructivism,  an  attitude  which  has 
been  sufficiently  described  in  the  preceding  pages.  It 
follows  in  general  the  policies  of  the  German  Marx* 
ians  led  by  Kautsky,  placing  the  chief  emphasis  upon 
political  activity,  making  much  of  immediate  meas- 
ures of  amelioration,  and  working  through  parlia- 
mentary channels  for  the  passage  of  these  meas- 
ures whenever  this  can  be  done  without  actual 
compromise.^ 

Beyond  the  party  lines  the  constructivists  shade 

'  Kautsky,  Road  to  Power,  p.  6i,  125;  Thompson  in  Int.  Soc.  Rev., 
July,  1905;  Cohen  in  the  same,  August,  1908. 


238  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

into  the  opportunists  or  Fabians,  Socialists  such  as 
Mrs.  Charlotte  Perkins  Oilman  and  Mr.  John  Mar- 
tin, who  aim  to  bring  about  the  cooperative  common- 
wealth by  the  aid  of  the  older  political  parties, 
without  invoking  the  class  struggle. 

On  the  left,  with  many  intermediate  gradations, 
we  have  the  revolutionists,  designated  by  those  op- 
posed to  them  as  "  impossibilists,"  consisting  to  a 
great  extent  of  Marxists  of  the  old  school,  but  partly 
of  non-theoretical  insurgents  whose  Socialism  bears 
the  stamp  of  the  French  syndicalists.  According  to 
Sombart,  the  last-named  influence  is  not  that  of 
Marxian  Socialism  in  that  the  economic  tendencies 
of  concentration  and  inevitability  proclaimed  by 
Engels  are  not  accepted  by  syndicalism.^  The  Marx- 
ist apologists,  among  whom  may  be  counted  Boudin, 
Untermann,  La  Monte,  and  Slobodin,  are  especially 
numerous  in  the  vicinity  of  New  York,  where  they 
include  prominent  Socialists  who  were  once  members 
of  the  Socialist  Labor  Party.  The  revolutionists  are 
usually  contemptuous  of  Christian  Socialism,  and, 
while  led  largely  by  "  intellectuals,"  contain  within 
their  number  most  of  the  "  ultra-proletarians." 

Perhaps  the  most  extreme  form  of  proletarian  and 
anti-religious  revolutionism  exists  across  the  Cana- 
dian border  in  British  Columbia,  where  the  Socialists 
have  declined  representation  in  the  International 
Socialist  Bureau  on  the  ground  of  the  admission  to 
that  body  of  the  British  Labor  Party.  Their  organ, 
the  Western  Clarion,  occupies  the  extremist  position 
at  every  point,  and  their  attitude  toward  reform  is 
illustrated  by  the  following  passage : 

*  Sombart,  op.  cit.  p.  104. 


OF   THE    PRESENT   DAY  239 

"  We  have  every  cause  to  congratulate  ourselves 
over  the  results  which  our  clear-cut,  uncompromising 
revolutionary  program  is  producing.  Reformists 
are  few  and  far  between,  and  are  principally  to  be 
found  outside  the  party,  a  position  which  they  occupy 
either  from  choice  or  discretion,  mostly  discretion, 
as  we  have  less  '  use  '  for  them  than  for  capitalism, 
which  is  saying  much,  and  that  strongly."  ^ 

The  Socialists  of  the  "  left "  are  for  the  most 
part  aggressive  advocates  of  industrial  unionism,  and 
uncompromising  enemies  of  the  American  Federa- 
tion of  Labor.  Their  tactics  maintain  the  rigid  "  No 
Compromise  "  attitude  that  is  opposed  to  all  parlia- 
mentarism, advocating  that  immediate  demands  be 
struck  out  of  the  national  platform,  that  legislative 
minorities  pursue  the  tactics  of  opposition  only,  and 
that  constant  emphasis  be  placed  in  propaganda  upon 
the  class  war.  They  antagonize  all  attempts  to  se- 
cure the  support  of  the  middle  classes  by  toning 
down  revolutionary  issues,  and  place  their  reliance 
less  in  the  gaining  of  political  power  than  in  the 
arousing  of  the  working  class  to  the  general  strike 
and  other  forms  of  "  direct  action."  The  strength 
of  this  minority  is  illustrated  by  the  fact  that  while, 
in  the  balloting  for  delegates  to  the  International 
Congress  of  19 10,  Victor  Berger  stood  first,  William 
Haywood,  a  well-known  revolutionist,  was  a  close 
second.  After  the  International  Socialist  Review, 
moreover,  embraced  the  revolutionist  tactics,  it 
claims  to  have  increased  its  circulation  in  two  years 
from  2000  to  40,000. 

While  the  revolutionists  pass,  on  the  one  side, 

*  The  Situation  in  British  Columbia,  Int.  Soc.  Rev.,  Feb.,  1910,  p.  742. 


240  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

beyond  the  party  lines  into  the  ranks  of  the  anarcho- 
syndicalists,  they  shade,  on  the  other,  into  the  more 
radical  constructivists ;  the  New  York  Marxists,  for 
example,  may  be  classed  with  the  left  in  their  oppo- 
sition to  the  Wisconsin  parliamentarians,  but  are  not 
necessarily  apostles  of  "  direct  action." 

While,  as  a  matter  of  convenience,  names  have 
here  been  affixed  to  the  various  divisions  of  policy 
and  sympathy  among  Socialists,  it  must  be  borne  in 
mind  that  the  very  use  of  such  terms  tends  unavoid- 
ably to  a  too  exact  classification  and  to  the  hardening 
into  boundaries  of  what  are  in  reality  but  shades  of 
difference.  The  expressions  "  revolutionist  "  and 
*'  constructivist,"  therefore,  must  be  taken  as  repre- 
senting extreme  types,  to  which  few  individuals  do 
more  than  approximate  in  one  or  more  directions. 


CHAPTER   XV 

THE  PRESENT  STATUS  OF  SOCIALISM  IN  THE 
UNITED  STATES 

Socialism  In  the  United  States  has  from  the  be- 
ginning been  of  slow  development,  as  was  brought 
out  in  the  historical  sketch  preliminary  to  this  study. 
The  most  striking  growth  in  the  Socialist  vote  was  in 
the  two  years  between  1902  and  1904,  during 
which  it  increased  from  223,494  to  409,230,^  —  a 
strength  due  partly  to  the  chance  vote  of  the  radical 
Democrats,  owing  to  the  conservative  character  of 
their  presidential  candidate  at  that  time.  This  fact 
was  clearly  shown  in  1908,  when  the  Socialists  la- 
bored under  a  disadvantage  in  opposing  both  Bryan, 
the  radical,  and  Taft,  who  was  expected  to  Inherit 
the  active  reform  policy  of  Roosevelt;  at  this  elec- 
tion, notwithstanding  the  prediction  of  a  million 
votes,  the  Socialist  total  had  swelled  only  to  424,483, 
and  in  1909  the  local  elections  in  several  states, 
notably  New  York,  showed  a  decided  loss.^ 

In  Wisconsin  alone  there  has  been  a  steady  growth, 
the  vote  in  Milwaukee  mounting  from  2400  In  1898 
to  15,000  In  1904,  21,000  In  1908,  and  27,000  In 
1 910. 

Since  1909,  however,  there  has  been  another 
period  of  striking  Socialist  advance.    In  this  year  the 

^  Hunter,  Socialists  at  Work,  p.  361. 
«  S.  P.  Official  Bulletin,  May,  1909. 


242  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

Social  Democrats  secured  control  of  the  city  of  Mil- 
waukee, and  by  1910  had  strengthened  their  repre- 
sentation in  the  Wisconsin  legislature  to  fourteen, 
including  two  state  senators.  The  national  election 
of  1910  increased  the  Socialist  vote  to  604,756,  —  a 
growth  of  over  40%  since  1908,  —  and  a  represen- 
tative in  Congress  was  for  the  first  time  elected. 
There  were  Socialists  in  the  legislatures  of  North 
Dakota,  Minnesota,  Pennsylvania,  and  Massachu- 
setts, and  Socialist  mayors  in  seventeen  municipali- 
ties besides  Milwaukee. 

The  membership  of  the  Socialist  Party  has  grown 
at  a  steadier  pace  than  the  vote,  —  from  26,784  in 
1906  to  41,751  in  1908,  falling  to  41,759  in  1909 
(chiefly  because  of  internal  dissensions  in  the  states 
of  Nebraska,  Texas,  and  Washington),  rising  again 
to  58,011  in  1910,  and  in  the  first  quarter  of  191 1, 
reaching  a  total  of  78,000.^ 

The  Socialist  Labor  Party  reached  its  highest  vote 
in  1898,  of  82,204.  These  figures  fell  after  the  for- 
mation of  the  new  party  in  1900  to  34,000,  rose  in 
1902  to  53,000,  and  since  that  time  have  steadily 
declined,  from  34,000  in  1904  to  15,000  in  1908.^ 
The  membership,  in  the  same  way,  has  gone  down 
from  2500  immediately  after  the  divisions  of  1900 
to  1498  in  1908,  and  at  present  numbers  from  about 
800  to  1000. 

During  the  last  few  years  there  has  been  a  popular 
impression  of  the  strengthening  of  Socialist  senti- 
ment as  shown  in  the  attitude  of  the  press,  the  pulpit, 
and  the  university,  the  labor  union  and  the  middle 
class   public.      Churches   and  lecture   institutes   are 

1  S.  P.  Official  Bulletin,  Feb.,  1910;  Jan.,  1911;  Report  of  National 
Secretary,  May  15,  1910.  *  Approximate  figures. 


OF  THE    PRESENT   DAY  243 

opening  their  platforms  to  Socialist  discussion,  37 
of  the  American  colleges  and  universities  now  offer 
courses  in  Socialism,  and  the  labor  unions  of  New 
York  have  begun  to  invite  definite  cooperation  from 
the  Socialist  Party. 

If  the  impression  of  popular  interest  is  correct,  a 
large  portion  of  this  new  Socialist  sentiment  must 
exist  as  mere  sympathy,  or  else  is  diverted  for  oppor- 
tunistic reasons  into  channels  other  than  the  Socialist 
parties;  ^  for,  notwithstanding  the  Socialist  wave  of 
1 9 10,  the  fact  remains  that  political  Socialism  is  far 
weaker  in  the  United  States,  as  regards  both  votes 
and  membership,  than  in  the  various  European  coun- 
tries. While  in  Germany  the  vote  in  191 1  reached 
more  than  three  and  a  quarter  millions,  and  in  France 
and  Austria  exceeded  a  million,  the  American  vote 
has  not  yet  come  near  the  million  mark.^ 

A  partial  explanation  of  the  slow  growth  of  the 
Socialist  vote  as  compared  with  the  party  member- 
ship is  the  circumstance  that  more  than  10%  of  the 
members  are  non-voting  women,  minors,  or  aliens.^ 
The  membership  of  the  Socialist  parties,  however, 
even  including  these  non-voters,  embraces  a  very 
small  percentage  of  the  population.  The  ultimate 
cause  of  the  comparative  weakness  of  American 
Socialism  lies  doubtless  in  the  peculiar  conditions 
of  our  society,  —  the  absence  of  hereditary  social 
classes,  with  the  presence  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  spirit 
of  individualism,  the  early  acquisition  of  political 
rights,  the  indirect  political  system  which  compels  us 
to  vote  for  men  rather  than  measures,  and,  most  of 

*  Thompson,  op.  cit.  p.  lo-ii. 

'  Thompson,  The  Rising  Tide  of  Socialism,  p.  I. 

»  S.  P.  Official  Bulletin,  April,  1909. 


244  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

all,  the  lateness  of  industrial  development  which  long 
kept  the  land  open  to  the  people  and  deferred  the 
emergence  of  the  labor  problem.^ 

More  immediate  causes  are  to  be  found  in  the 
divided  state  of  organized  labor,  with  its  prevailing 
principle  against  participation  in  politics,  and  in  the 
conditions  of  the  American  Socialist  Party  itself. 
The  organization  of  the  party  is  unduly  cumbersome, 
sacrificing  at  many  points  efficiency  to  democracy, 
and  it  is  admitted  that  the  routine  work  of  internal 
management  takes  up  much  energy  that  would  other- 
wise be  devoted  to  the  task,  —  "  agitate,  educate, 
organize."  ^ 

Many  individuals  of  the  Socialist  Party,  more- 
over, have  added  to  the  rigidity  of  the  No  Compro- 
mise attitude  a  spirit  of  sectarianism  that  has  op- 
posed indiscriminately  every  force  outside  of  itself, 
while  it  has  held  aloof  from  the  concrete  problems 
absorbing  the  public  attention. 

The  barrenness  of  effort  resulting  from  the  de- 
fects just  mentioned  strengthens  the  natural  dislike 
of  "  throwing  away  one's  vote,"  which  is  always 
ready  to  strangle  the  third  party  in  its  cradle,  and 
thus  keeps  away  the  support  of  many  Socialist 
sympathizers. 

The  requirement  of  the  pledge  acknowledging  the 
cla/ss  struggle  and  renouncing  all  connection  with 
other  political  parties  is  an  additional  factor  in  keep- 
ing down  the  membership  of  the  party,  as  distinct 
from  the  vote.  The  correspondence  of  the  party 
press  contains  frequent  protests  against  this  require- 

'  Gilman,  op.  cit.,  p.  57,  seq. 

*  See  correspondence  in  Call,  June  8,  Aug.  20,  Nov.  21,  Dec.  26, 
1909;  Jan.  2,  1910. 


OF  THE   PRESENT  DAY.  2451 

ment,  and  the  recent  Socialist  Party  Congress  has 
modified  the  pledge  so  as  to  declare  antagonism  to 
all  parties  formed  by  the  "  capitalist,"  rather  than 
the  "  propertied "  classes.^  Though  apparently 
slight,  this  change  of  wording  is  an  admission  of  sym- 
pathy with  organizations  of  the  propertied  but  non- 
capitalist  middle  class,  such  as  the  Farmers'  Conven- 
tion, to  which  a  delegate  was  sent  in  19 10  by  the 
Socialist  Party.^ 

As  indicated  by  the  slight  falling  off  in  the  mem- 
bership during  1909,  it  is  probable  that  internal  dis- 
sensions are  an  important  cause  of  the  failure  of  the 
Socialist  Party  to  expand  in  the  same  degree  as  the 
parties  in  Europe.^  In  so  far  as  these  disputes  are 
based  on  the  natural  differentiation  between  the  rev- 
olutionist on  the  left  and  the  constructivist  on  the 
right,  they  are  an  inevitable  accompaniment  of  any 
considerable  social  movement,  and  are  salutary  in 
so  far  as  they  keep  the  party  from  crystallization. 
The  intellectual-proletarian  antagonism,  on  the  other 
hand,  is  wholly  weakening  in  its  tendency,  and,  were 
it  not  so  largely  of  an  artificial  character,  would  seri- 
ously threaten  American  Socialism.  The  differences 
as  to  Marxian  doctrine  appear  to  be  less  a  real  cause 
of  dissension  than  a  convenient  base  upon  which  to 
found  criticism  of  a  tactical  opponent,  and  it  is  prob- 
able that  variations  in  religious  belief  will  tend,  in 
the  Socialist  Party,  as  elsewhere,  to  become  softened 
with  the  general  progress  of  toleration.  Such  a  lib- 
eral spirit  is  shown  in  a  recent  comment  by  the  "  ultra- 
revolutionary  "  International  Socialist  Review  upon 
a  book  of  Rev.  Thomas  C.  Hall: 

»  N.  Y.  Call,  May  21,  1910. 
«  S.  P.  Off.  Bull.,  April,  1910. 
'  Ibid,  Jan.,  1910. 


246  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

"  Doctor  Hall  is  not  only  a  thorough  Marxian 
.  .  .  but  he  Is  a  scholar  as  well.  .  .  .  Anybody  who 
reads  Social  Solutions  will  realize  that  Doctor  Hall 
is  best  fitted  to  bridge  the  differences  between  the 
Church  progressive  and  Socialism.  He  has  accom- 
plished a  good  work  and  paved  the  way  for  a 
stronger  movement  toward  the  great  Social  Solution 
—  the  common  ownership  of  the  means  of  produc- 
tion and  distribution."  ^ 

The  problems  connected  with  organized  labor,  on 
the  other  hand,  are  likely  to  become  rather  more 
serious  than  at  present  until  the  bulk  of  American 
unionists  decide  permanently  for  one  or  the  other 
form  of  organization,  and  until  their  political  or 
non-political  status  Is  firmly  established.  The  man- 
ner In  which  the  latter  question  Is  settled  Is  vital  to 
American  Socialism,  as  without  the  alliance,  individ- 
ual or  collective,  of  the  organized  workers,  it  can 
never  hope  to  rise  from  a  cult  to  a  power. 

An  element  of  permanent  strength  in  the  Socialist 
parties  is  contained  in  two  portions  of  their  member- 
ship which  temporarily  reduce  their  voting  force,  — 
the  women  and  the  aliens.  The  Socialist  parties  are 
the  only  political  bodies  which  admit  women  under 
the  same  terms  as  men,  and  if,  as  is  possible,  the  suf- 
frage is  granted  to  women  at  a  date  not  far  remote, 
the  Socialist  Party  will  already  claim  the  allegiance 
of  an  organized  body  of  women.  Preparations  are 
already  being  made  for  the  naturalization  of  foreign- 
born  Socialist  women  with  a  view  to  that  occasion. 
While  the  immigrant  acquisitions  to  the  Socialist 
parties  are  not  immediately  available  for  voting  pur- 

*  International  Socialist  Review,  April,  1910,  p.  943. 


OF  THE    PRESENT  DAY  247 

poses,  these  differ  from  the  foreign-born  voters  of 
other  parties  in  that  many  of  them  are  already  Social- 
ists, familiar  with  the  program  and  constitution  of 
an  allied  party  of  the  International,  and  sometimes 
able  to  contribute  valuable  training  gained  in  the 
cooperatives  of  Belgium,  the  Socialist  politics  of 
France  or  Germany,  or  the  labor  unions  of  England. 

A  saving  virtue  in  American  Socialism,  moreover, 
is  its  capacity  for  self-criticism.  For  months  after 
the  elections  of  1909  the  party  press  teemed  with 
answers  to  the  question,  — "  What  is  the  matter 
with  the  Socialist  Party?  "  and  very  rarely  did  these 
letters  voice  an  attempt  to  charge  the  disappointment 
of  the  polls  wholly  to  external  factors.^  As  a  result 
of  these  criticisms  the  party  in  New  York  instituted 
important  changes  in  local  organization,  entered  vig- 
orously into  constructive  work  in  cooperation  with 
the  labor  unions,  and  to  some  extent  took  a  hint 
from  the  Milwaukee  Socialists  in  diverting  its  efforts 
from  the  holding  of  street  meetings  to  the  systematic 
distribution  of  literature. 

As  far  as  national  affairs  are  concerned,  it  seems 
possible  for  the  American  Socialists  to  sink  their  dif- 
ferences and  cooperate  when  a  definite  task  demands 
it.  In  1900  the  various  factions  that  had  failed  in 
uniting  to  form  a  new  party  were  able  to  work  peace- 
fully together  through  a  presidential  campaign,  and, 
although  the  Labor  Party  dispute  in  1909  threatened 
again  to  disrupt  the  party,  the  ensuing  election  for 
the  National  Executive  Committee  was  generally  ac- 
cepted as  the  settlement  of  the  discussion  by  the  voice 
of  the  majority.  Furthermore,  while  controversy 
is  frequent  as  to  matters  of  tactics  and  relation  to 

*  See  N.  Y.  Call,  Nov.  14,  17;  Dec.  12,  1909;  Jan.  i6,  1910. 


248  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

outside  organizations,  there  is,  as  was  shown  by  pre- 
vious chapters  of  this  study,  a  substantial  agreement 
among  the  factions  as  to  all  portions  of  the  national 
platform  with  the  possible  exception  of  a  part  of  the 
immediate  demands.  The  two  Socialist  parties  have 
existed  without  a  "  split  "  for  ten  years,  and,  in  spite 
of  dissensions,  few  if  any  leaders  have  during  that 
time  withdrawn  their  support. 

An  illustration  of  the  solidarity  of  the  Socialist 
Party  was  afforded  by  the  nominations  at  the  na- 
tional convention  of  1908.  Owing  to  sensational 
circumstances  in  the  preceding  year,  a  demand  had 
arisen  on  the  part  of  the  revolutionists  for  the  nomi- 
nation of  William  Haywood,  of  the  Western  Feder- 
ation of  Miners,  as  President  of  the  United  States. 
The  constructivists,  on  the  other  hand,  had  suggested 
the  nomination  of  the  Christian  Socialist,  Carl 
Thompson,  of  Wisconsin.  When,  however,  both 
sides  realized  the  impossibility  of  united  action  with 
either  of  these  candidates,  all  divisions  of  the  party 
rallied  to  the  unanimous  nomination  of  Eugene  V. 
Debs  and  Ben  Hanford,  Socialists  who  had  kept  free 
from  controversy  and  retained  the  loyalty  of  the 
party  as  a  whole. ^ 

The  International  Socialist  Review,  which  led  the 
insurgents  in  the  opposition  to  the  National  Execu- 
tive Committee  in  1909,  expressed  itself  thus  in  an 
editorial  immediately  after  the  election  to  that  body 
had  taken  place: 

"  It  is  easy  to  become  excited  over  our  varying 
opinions  as  to  tactics,  and  to  overrate  their  impor- 
tance.    When  all  is  said,   our  agreements   are  of 

*  International  Socialist  Review,  June,  1908,  p.  730. 


OF  THE    PRESENT  DAY  249 

vastly  more  importance  than  our  differences.  We 
believe  that  the  opportunists  within  the  party  are 
working  on  a  mistaken  theory  and  are  to  some  extent 
misdirecting  their  strength,  but  we  have  not  the 
least  desire  to  wage  war  on  them.  Our  enemy  is 
capitalism."  ^ 

The  foregoing  chapters  have  endeavored  to  give 
a  picture  of  present-day  American  Socialism,  with 
special  reference  to  the  principal  Socialist  body  in 
the  United  States,  the  Socialist  Party.  As  explained 
at  the  outset,  the  study  has  shared  the  inconsisten- 
cies of  its  subject,  which  exists  not  as  a  science,  but 
as  a  rapidly  changing  popular  movement.  There 
has  been  need  to  observe  not  only  the  essay,  but  the 
street  propaganda,  not  only  the  logical,  but  the  illog- 
ical Socialist,  provided  only  he  be  acknowledged  by 
the  party  organization. 

The  inquiry  has  shown  a  movement  whose  doc- 
trine is  professedly  Marxian  and  at  most  points 
actually  so.  The  explanation  of  crises  by  a  special 
overproduction  theory  has  been  largely  superseded, 
the  expectation  of  catastrophe  materially  modified, 
and  the  existence  of  surplus  value  based  more  and 
more  upon  induction  from  the  facts  of  industry  than 
upon  the  Marxian  labor  theory.  The  economic  in- 
terpretation of  history,  however,  and  preeminently 
the  class  struggle  doctrine,  constitute  the  foundation 
of  Socialist  teaching  in  the  United  States. 

American  Socialist  students,  such  as  Untermann, 
Boudin,  and  La  Monte,  have  made  contributions  to 
Socialist  literature  in  the  shape  of  translations  and 
apologist  discussions  of  Marx.     Others,  including 

*  International  Socialist  Review,  Feb.,  1910,  p.  745. 


250  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

Hlllquit,  Spargo,  Simons,  and  Ghent,  have  inter- 
preted these  doctrines,  and  in  some  instances  have 
worked  out  contributions  to  the  Marxian  theory  by 
applying  them  to  legal  institutions,  the  ethical  and 
religious  concepts,  American  economic  history,  and 
American  capitalistic  development.  Certain  of  the 
last-named  authors  have  dealt  with  Marx's  doc- 
trines from  the  Revisionist  point  of  view;  yet  the 
influence  of  such  writers  as  Bernstein  seems  here 
to  be  felt  less  in  changes  of  doctrine  than  in  a  ten- 
dency to  avoid  prophecies  of  cataclysm  and  to 
neglect  as  non-essential  the  pure  economics  of  Marx. 
In  general,  the  contributions  of  America  to  scien- 
tific Socialist  literature  constitute  a  comparatively 
small  body,  —  a  circumstance  which  may  be  ac- 
counted for  partly  by  the  youth  of  the  movement. 
Twenty  years  ago  the  Socialism  of  the  United  States 
was  in  the  Utopian  stage  of  Nationalism,  and  the 
Socialist  Labor  Party  merely  a  small  cult  of  foreign- 
born  Marxians.  The  American  economists  of  the 
last  generation  either  ignored  Socialism  with  Mac- 
Vane  and  Patten,  or  dismissed  it,  like  Francis  A. 
Walker,  with  the  remark: 

"  Few  of  these  [Socialist]  writers  have  had  either 
the  kind  of  education  or  the  opportunities  for  obser- 
vation which  would  qualify  them  to  form  valuable 
opinions  on  such  a  question."  * 

Unlike  the  Germans,  therefore,  who  have  for 
forty  years  been  confronted  with  a  scientific  litera- 
ture for  and  against  the  Marxian  doctrines,  Ameri- 

*  First  Lessons  in  Political  Economy,  p.  224.  In  his  larger  works 
Walker  merely  touches  upon  the  enlargement  of  state  functions,  and  does 
not  allude  to  the  theory  or  demands  of  Marxian  Socialism. 


OF  THE    PRESENT  DAY.  251 

can  Socialists  have  until  recently  possessed  almost 
a  monopoly  of  knowledge  upon  the  subject,  and  felt 
the  need  of  but  little  close  reasoning  in  worsting  op- 
ponents who  were  generally  more  or  less  misin- 
formed. The  present  generation  is  the  first  in  the 
United  States  to  give  serious  attention  to  the  subject 
of  Socialism,  and  it  is  only  for  a  short  time  that  there 
has  existed  Socialist  writing  of  a  grade  above  that 
of  propaganda. 

The  tendency  of  original  Marxian  thought  in 
America,  in  any  case,  is  distinctly  away  from  the  dis- 
cussion of  theory.  Revisionist  or  the  contrary.  So- 
cialism, like  religion,  shares  at  present  the  trend  of 
investigation  and  education  toward  the  concrete  and 
the  utilitarian,  rather  than  to  the  abstract,  and  the 
United  States  has  entered  upon  Socialist  activity  at 
a  stage  when  the  issue  is  too  vital  to  give  free  play  to 
the  spirit  of  pure  philosophy. 

It  is  in  the  field  of  applied  Socialism,  at  the  thresh- 
old of  which  Marx  stopped  to  await  the  course  of 
economic  development,  that  the  present-day  Marxian 
is  beginning  to  work.  The  ultimate  expropriation 
of  the  means  of  production,  including  the  organiza- 
tion of  production  and  distribution,  with  the  prob- 
lems of  assignment  of  labor,  incentive,  remunera- 
tion, and  value,  constitutes  Socialism  proper,  to 
which  the  Marxian  theory  is  but  an  introduction  and 
the  immediate  program  but  a  step.  While  the  Uto- 
pians have  until  recently  been  the  chief  creators  of 
this  doctrine,  a  beginning  of  detailed  work  has 
been  made  by  Marxists  in  these  directions,  especially 
in  the  formulation  of  plans  for  the  extent  and 
method  of  expropriation. 

We  have  seen  that  as  a  political  party  American 


252  AMERICAN   SOCIALISM 

Socialism  possesses  a  definite  organization  character- 
ized by  discipline,  extreme  democracy,  and  interna- 
tionalism. It  promulgates  a  series  of  immediate 
demands,  which,  while  containing  most  of  the  cur- 
rently proposed  reforms,  include  also  instalments 
of  actual  Socialism;  its  tactics,  distinguished  in  gen- 
eral by  the  principle  of  No  Compromise,  are  guided 
by  those  of  the  German  Social  Democracy  wherever 
a  position  of  political  significance  has  been  attained. 
While,  with  the  exception  of  the  non-affiliated  op- 
portunists and  the  Socialist  Labor  Party,  the  Social- 
ists of  the  United  States  form  a  united  body,  there 
are  important  internal  differences  in  policy,  shading 
from  the  constructivists  on  the  right  to  the  revolu- 
tionists on  the  left  of  the  Socialist  Party.  The  asser- 
tion as  to  the  existence  of  many  varieties  of  Ameri- 
can Socialists  is  therefore  justified  only  with  relation 
to  these  many  shades  of  tactical  policy,  founded  usu- 
ally on  corresponding  gradations  of  emphasis  upon 
the  idea  of  catastrophe.  In  other  important  points, 
including  allegiance  to  the  Marxian  philosophy  in 
general,  acceptance  of  the  discipline  of  the  Socialist 
Party,  and  assent,  with  the  exception  of  certain 
immediate  demands,  to  the  national  platform, 
the  Socialists  of  the  United  States  are  in  mutual 
accord. 

Our  study  of  the  facts  of  present  American  Social- 
ism is  ended.  To  all  whose  interest  in  the  subject  is 
a  strong  one.  Socialist  and  non-socialist  alike,  there 
comes  the  temptation  to  attempt  a  forecast  of  the 
future.  While  to  the  Marxian  such  a  forecast  is  an 
integral  part  of  his  doctrine,  to  the  non-Marxian 
such  a  prognostication  here,  as  generally  in  affairs 
dealing  with  human  choice,  is  a  dangerous  pastime. 


OF  THE   PRESENT  DAY  253 

The  Marxians  teach  that  the  course  of  economic 
development  in  America  must  sooner  or  later  bring 
Socialism,  and  upon  the  truth  or  falsity  of  this  claim 
depends  the  fate  of  the  Socialist  movement  in  the 
broad  sense  of  the  term.  Granting  the  utmost  con- 
tention of  the  Marxians,  however,  we  have  no  assur- 
ance that  Socialism  may  not  come  after  a  period 
of  industrial  oligarchy,  factional  anarchy,  'or  vio- 
lent class  conflict,  or  on  the  other  hand  as  the  result 
of  a  slow  transformation  of  the  present  industrial 
and  political  system  through  non-partisan  Socialist 
influence. 

The  future  of  the  Socialist  parties  in  the  United 
States  must  depend  not  only  upon  the  acceleration 
or  retardation  of  the  general  movement  through  eco- 
nomic development,  but  upon  the  influences  which 
may  affect  their  own  internal  character  and  that  of 
the  older  political  parties. 

In  the  present  somewhat  disorganized  condition 
of  the  Republican  and  Democratic  parties,  it  is  easy 
to  conceive  of  an  alignment  of  forces  that  might 
either  enlist  on  the  side  of  Socialism  the  power  of 
the  radicals,  or  else  range  the  latter  in  a  new  party, 
relegating  the  Socialists  for  an  indefinite  period  to 
the  third  or  fourth  place.  Furthermore,  the  power 
of  organized  labor,  as  has  already  been  indicated, 
may  decide  to  remain  in  general  non-partisan,  to  lend 
its  support  definitely  to  one  of  the  old  parties  or  a 
new  radical  party  in  return  for  services  rendered,  to 
organize  as  a  strictly  independent  labor  party,  or  to 
accept  the  oft-repeated  invitation  to  ally  itself  with 
the  Socialists.  Sombart  expresses  the  opinion,  in  the 
new  edition  of  his  book  on  Socialism,  that  the  Ameri- 
can labor  movement  is  tending  more  and  more  in  the 


254  AMERICAN    SOCIALISM 

last-named  direction,  and  that  "  It  seems  pretty  prob- 
able that  Socialism  will  make  rapid  strides  in  Amer- 
ica within  the  next  few  decades."  ^ 

The  policy  of  the  Socialists  themselves  will  doubt- 
less be  influential  in  affecting  such  party  readjust- 
ments. If  the  constructivists  continue  more  and 
more  to  shape  the  Socialist  tactics,  the  labor  unionists 
and  extreme  radicals  among  the  other  parties  might 
find  the  intervening  step  less  difficult,  and  join  with 
the  working-class  party  in  bringing  about  the  transi- 
tional Socialist  state;  if,  on  the  contrary,  the  revo- 
lutionists should  gain  the  majority  among  American 
Socialists,  the  support  of  the  militant  industrial 
unionists  might  be  held,  while  the  gulf  between  the 
Socialists  and  the  reformers  would  be  likely  to  widen 
until  the  inauguration  of  a  real  class  war. 

A  certain  responsibility  as  to  the  future  of  Social- 
ism in  America  rests  with  the  cultural  institutions  of 
church,  press,  and  university.  Hostility  on  the  part 
of  these  forces  tends  in  general  to  weaken  the  influ- 
ence of  the  "  intellectuals  "  and  the  Christian  Social- 
ists, to  harden  the  party  organization  on  the  lines 
of  the  class  struggle,  and  to  render  the  revolutionist 
the  dominant  Socialist  type.  If  the  movement  is  ig- 
nored by  the  higher  intellectual  forces,  on  the  other 
hand,  there  is  danger  that  Socialism,  encountering  in 
controversy  only  the  ignorant  and  unscientific,  may 
rest  satisfied  with  the  unrevised  economics  of  the  last 
century  and  win  the  support  of  the  people  by  su- 
perficial propaganda  and  specious  promises  of  a 
millennium. 

The  theories  of  Marxian  Socialism  have  received 
careful   and   fruitful  attention   from   economists   in 

*  Sombart,  op.  cit.,  Revised,  p.  278,  seq. 


OF   THE    PRESENT   DAY  255 

Europe,  and  recently  in  the  United  States,  though 
few  of  these  studies  exist  in  a  form  accessible  to  the 
American  public.  The  ultimate  and  immediate  de- 
mands of  Socialism,  on  the  contrary,  have,  for  the 
most  part,  been  neglected  by  scientific  non-socialists, 
being  left  on  the  one  hand  to  the  indulgent  criticism 
of  reformers  such  as  Professor  Ely  and  on  the  other 
to  the  unbridled  polemics  of  writers  of  the  type  of 
Mallock  and  Cathrein.  Yet  that  which  calls  itself 
Marxian  Socialism,  irrespective  of  its  scientific  title 
to  that  designation,  is  in  the  United  States  laying  less 
and  less  emphasis  upon  theory.  It  is  itself  not  a 
science,  but  a  popular  movement;  and  is  using  the 
doctrines  of  the  class  struggle  and  the  economic  in- 
terpretation of  history  as  a  basis  for  an  ultimate 
program,  a  series  of  immediate  demands,  and  a 
summons  of  the  working  class  to  either  constructive 
or  revolutionary  action. 

Marx,  the  closet-philosopher  of  Capital,  is  becom- 
ing less  and  less  a  factor  in  American  Socialism. 
Marx,  the  revolutionist  of  the  Communist  Mani- 
festo and  the  opportunist  of  the  International,  ex- 
ercises an  ever  stronger  influence  upon  the  rapidly 
growing  American  movement.  This  movement  is 
urging  its  program  and  tactics  upon  the  people  of  the 
United  States;  and  it  is  for  economic  science  to  test 
this  program  and  tactics  and  guide  the  people  in 
purifying,  accepting,  or  rejecting  them. 


\ 


A  LIST  OF  PUBLICATIONS 

TO  WHICH  REFERENCE  HAS  BEEN  MADE  t 

Adams,  Thomas  Sewall,  and  Sumner,  Helen. 

Labor  Problems  —  A  Text-Book.  The  Macmillan  Co.,  New  York 
and  London,  1905. 

Bernstein,  Eduard. 

Ferdinand  Lassalle  as  a  Social  Reformer.  Translated  by  E.  M. 
Aveling,  London,  1893. 

Bohm-Bawerk,  Eugen  von. 

Karl  Marx  and  the  close  of  his  system  —  A  criticism.  Translated 
by  A.  M.  Macdonald  with  a  preface  by  Jas.  Bonar.  New  York, 
1898. 

Booth,  Chas. 

Life  and  Labor  of  the  People  in  London.  The  Macmillan  Com- 
pany, New  York  and  London,  1902. 

Boudin,  Louis  B.,  LL.M. 

The  Theoretical  System  of  Karl  Marx  in  the  Light  of  Recent  Criti- 
cism.   Chas.  H.  Kerr  &  Co.,  Chicago,  1907. 

Bellamy,  Edward  B. 

Looking  Backward,  2000-1887,  with  an  introduction  by  Sylvester 
Baxter.    Houghton,  Mifflin  &  Co.,  Boston  and  New  York,  1898. 

Besant,  A. 

See  Fabian  Essays. 

Bliss,  William  D.  P.,  Editor-in-chief,  and  Rudolph  M.  Binder,  Ph.D.^ 
Assistant  Editor,  etc. 
The  New  Encyclopedia  of  Social  Reform.      New  Edition,  Funk 
&  Wagnalls  Co.,  New  York  and  London,  1908. 

Bebel,  August. 

Woman  under  Socialism  —  Translated  from  the  original  German 
of  the  33rd  edition  by  Daniel  De  Leon.  New  York  Labor  News 
Co.,  New  York,  1904. 

Bax,  Ernest  Belfort. 

The  Religion  of  Socialism,  being  essays  in  modem  social  criticism. 

London  and  New  York  (Chas.  Scribner's  Sons),  1902. 
Outlooks  from  the  New  Standpoint.     Second  edition.    London  and 

New  York  (Chas.  Scribner's  Sons),  1893. 


258        A   LIST   OF   PUBLICATIONS 

Chapln,  Robert  Coit,  Ph.D.,  Horace  White  Professor  of  Economics  and 
Finance  in  Beloit  College,  Wisconsin  —  Russell  Sage  Foundation. 
Standard  of  Living  among  Workingmen's  Families  in  New  York 
City.    Charities  Publication  Committee,  New  York,  1909. 

Cathrein,  Victor,  S.  J. 

Socialism,  its  theoretical  basis  and  practical  application.  Authorized 
translation  of  the  8th  German  ed.,  with  special  reference  to  the 
condition  of  Soc.  in  the  U.  S.  Revised  and  enlarged  by  Victor  F. 
Gettelmann,  S.J.  Benziger  Bros.,  New  York,  Cincinnati,  Chicago, 
1904. 

Cohen,  Joseph  E. 

Socialism  for  Students,    Chas.  H.  Kerr  &  Co.,  Chicago,  1910. 

Caimes,   J.   E.,  M.A.,  Emeritus   Professor  of  Political  Economy   in 
University  College,  London. 
Some  Leading  Principles  of  Political  Economy  newly  Expounded. 
London,  1874. 

Debs,  Eugene  V. 

The  Issue  —  Wayland's  Monthly,  No.  97,  1908.    J.  A.  Wayland, 

Girard,  Kansas. 
Unionism  and  Socialism  —  Wayland's  Monthly,  No.  52.      J.  A. 

Wayland,  Girard,  Kansas,  1904. 
The  Socialist  Party  and  the  Working  Class  (Pamphlet). 

Engels,  Frederick,  and  Marx,  Karl. 
The  Communist  Manifesto. 

Socialistic  Cooperative  Pub.  Assoc.  (Soc.  Library,  Feb.  i),  New 
York,  1 90 1. 

Engels,  Frederick. 

Socialism,  Utopian  and  Scientific.  Translated  by  Edward  Aveling 
(Library  of  Progress,  No.  34).  Chas.  H.  Kerr  &  Co.,  Chicago, 
1900. 

Ensor,  R.  C.  K. 

Modern  Socialism  as  set  forth  by  Socialists  in  their  speeches,  writ- 
ings, and  programmes.  Harper  &  Bros.,  London  and  New  York, 
1904. 

The  Encyclopedia  Britamilca,  a  dictionary  of  arts,  sciences,  and  gen- 
eral literature.    9th  edition.    Edinburgh,  1887. 

Fabian  Essays  in  Socialism.    London,  1889.    (Also  American  Edition. 
Edited  by  H.  G.  Wilshire,  Humboldt  Publishing  Co.,  1891.    Social 
Science  Library.) 

Ferri,  Enrico. 

Socialism  and  Modern  Science,  translated  by  Robert  Rives  La 
Monte.  Second  edition.  International  Library  Pub.  Co.,  New 
York,  1904. 


A   LIST   OF   PUBLICATIONS        259 

Fawcett,  Henry,  M.P.,  Fellow  of  Trinity  Hall,  etc. 

Manual  of  Political  Economy.  5th  edition.  Revised  and  En- 
larged.   London,  1876. 

Gronlund,  Laurence,  M.A. 

The  New  Economy;    a  peaceable  solution  of  the  social  problem. 

Chicago,  1898. 
The    Cooperative    Commonwealth,    an    exposition   of    Socialism. 

Boston,  Lee  &  Shepard,  1903. 

Ghent,  W.J. 

Mass  and  Class.    A  Survey  of  Social  Divisions.    The  Macmillan 

Co.,  New  York,  1905. 
Our  Benevolent  Feudalism.    The  Macmillan  Co.,  New  York,  1902. 

Oilman,  Nicholas  Paine. 

Socialism  and  the  American  Spirit.  Houghton,  Mifflin  &  Co., 
Boston  and  New  York,  1893. 

Hirsch,  Max  (Melbourne). 

Democracy  versus  Socialism,  a  critical  examination  of  socialism 
as  a  remedy  for  social  injustice  and  an  exposition  of  the  single  tax 
doctrine.    The  Macmillan  Co.,  London  and  New  York,  1901. 

Hillquit,  Morris. 

A  History  of  Socialism  in  the  United  States.    Funk  and  Wagnalls 

Co.,  New  York,  1906.      (Also  Revised  Edition.) 
Socialism  in  Theory  and  Practice.    The  Macmillan  Co.,  New  York, 

1909. 

Hunter,  Robert. 

Poverty.    The  Macmillan  Co.,  New  York,  1906. 
Socialists  at  Work.    The  Macmillan  Co.,  New  York,  1908. 

Hadley,  Arthur  Twining,  President  of  Yale  University. 
Economics.    G.  P.  Putnam's  Sons,  New  York,  1897. 
The  Education  of  the  American  Citizen.    Chas.  Scribner's  Sons, 
New  York,  1901. 

Hanford,  Ben. 

The  Labor  War  in  Colorado  (Volkszeitung  Library,  Vol.  6,  No.  4), 
Socialistic  Cooperative  Pub.  Assoc,  New  York,   1904. 

Railroading  in  the  United  States  (Pamphlet).  Socialistic  Co- 
operative Pub.  Assoc,  New  York,  1904. 

Socialism  and  the  Organized  Labor  Movement  (Pamphlet). 

Hobson,  John  A. 

The  Economics  of  Distribution  (The  Citizen's  Library).  The 
Macmillan  Co.,  London,  and  New  York,  1903. 

Elampffmeyer,  Paul. 

Changes  in  the  Theory  and  Tactics  of  the  (German)  Social-Democ- 
racy. Translated  by  Winfield  R.  Gaylord.  Chas.  H.  Kerr  &  Co., 
Chicago,  1908.^* 


26o        A   LIST   OF   PUBLICATIONS 

Eautsky,  Karl. 

The  Road  to  Power.     Authorized  translation  by  A.  M.  Simons. 

Chicago,  1909. 
Die  Agra rf rage;  Eine  Ubersicht  iiber  die  Tendenzen  der  Modemen 

Landwirthschaft    und    die  Agrarpolitik   der   Sozialdemokratie. 

Stuttgart,  1899. 
The  Social  Revolution  and  On  the  Morrow  of  the  Social  Revolution. 

Translated  from  the  German  by  J.  B.  Askew.  London,  1907.  (Also 

Kerr  Edition,  Chicago,  1905.) 
Bernstein  und  das  Sozialdemokratische  Programme  —  Eine  An- 

tikritik.     Stuttgart,    1899. 

Eirkup,  Thomas. 

A  History  of  Socialism.  New  edition,  revised  and  enlarged.  Lon- 
don, 1900. 

London,  Jack.    Author  of  "The  Call  of  the  Wild,"  etc. 

The  Iron  Heel.   The  Macmillan  Co.,  New  York,  1908.  ^ 

Ladoff,  Isador. 

The  Passing  of  Capitalism  and  the  Mission  of  Socialism.  Terre 
Haute,  1901. 

Lewis,  Arthur  Morrow. 

Evolution,  Social  and  Organic.    Chas.  H.  Kerr  &  Co.,  Chicago,  1908. 
Ten  Blind  Leaders  of  the  Blind.    Chas.  H.  Kerr  &  Co.,  Chicago, 
1909. 

LeflSngwell,  Wm.  H. 

Easy  Lessons  in  Socialism.  Pocket  Library  of  Soc.  No.  38.  Chas. 
H.  Kerr  &  Co.,  Chicago  (undated). 

LaMonte,  Robert  Rives. 

Socialism,  Positive  and  Negative.  Chas.  H.  Kerr  &  Co.,  Chicago 
1907. 

laebknecht,  Wilhelm. 

No  Compromise  —  No  Political  Trading.  Translated  by  A.  M. 
Simons  and  Marcus  Hitch  (Unity  Library,  No.  102).  Chas.  H. 
Kerr  &  Co.,  Chicago,  1900. 

Karl  Marx  —  Biographical  Memoirs.  Translated  by  E.  Untermann. 
Chas.  H.  Kerr  &  Co.,  Chicago,  1901. 

Socialism  —  What  it  is  and  What  it  Seeks  to  Accomplish.  Trans- 
lated by  May  Wood  Simons.  Chas.  H.  Kerr  &  Co.,^Chicago.  (Un- 
dated pamphlet.) 

Le  Rossignol,  James  Edward,  Ph.D.,  Professor  of  Economics  in  the 
University  of  Denver. 
Orthodox   Socialism.    A  criticism.    Thomas  Y.  Crowell   &  Co., 
New  York,  1907. 

Marc,  Karl. 

Capital:  a  critical  analysis  of  capitalist  production.  Translated 
from  the  third  German  edition  by  Samuel  Moore  and  Edward 


A   LIST   OF   PUBLICATIONS        261 

Aveling  and  edited  by  Frederick  Engels.  Vol.  I.  Pt.  i.  (Hum- 
boldt Library  of  Science).  Humboldt  Publishing  Co.,  New  York, 
1891.  (Also  Vol.  I.  London,  1904.)  Vol.  HL  Translated  from 
the  first  German  edition  by  Ernest  Untermann.  Chas.  H.  Kerr 
&  Co.,  Chicago,  1909. 

Das  Elend  der  Philosophie.  Antwort  auf  Proudhons  "Philosophic 
des  Elends."  Deutsch  von  E.  Bernstein  und  K.  Kautsky  mit  Vor- 
wort  und  Noten  von  Friedrich  Engels. 

Wage  Labor  and  Capital.  Translated  by  J.  L.  Joynes.  Pocket 
Lib.  of  Soc.  No.  7.    Chas.  H.  Kerr  &  Co.,  Chicago,  1899. 

The  Communist  Manifesto.    See  Engels. 

A  Contribution  to  the  Critique  of  Political  Economy.  Translated 
from  the  second  German  edition  by  N.  L  Stone.  International 
Library  Pub.  Co.,  New  York,  1904. 

MaUock,  W.  H.,  M.A.,  of  England. 

Socialism.    The  National  Civic  Federation,  New  York  (undated). 

Menger,  Dr.  Anton,  Professor  of  Jurisprudence  in  the  University  of 

Vienna. 

The  Right  to  the  Whole  Produce  of  Labor.  The  origin  and  devel- 
opment of  the  theory  of  labor's  claim  to  the  whole  product  of 
industry.  Translated  by  M.  G.  Tanner,  with  an  introduction  and 
bibliography  by  H.  S.^Farwell,  M.A.,  Professor  of  Economics  at 
University  College,  London,  etc.  The  Macmillan  Co.,  London 
and  New  York,  1899. 

L'Etat  Socialiste,  traduit  par  Edgard  Milland,  Professeur  a  I'Uni- 
versite  de  Geneve,  avec  une  Introduction  de  Charles  Audler. 
Paris,  1904. 

Morris,  William. 

News  from  Nowhere,  or  an  Epoch  of  Rest,  being  some  chapters  from 
a  Utopian  romance.     The  Humboldt  Library,  New  York. 

Mackaye,   James. 

The  Economy  of  Happiness.  'Little,  Brown  &  Co.,  Boston,  1906. 

Palgrave,  R.  H.  Inglis,  F.R.S.  (editor). 

Dictionary  of  Political  Economy.  The  Macmillan  Co.,  London 
and  New  York,  1899. 

Patterson,  Joseph  Med  ill. 

Socialist  Campaign  Book.  Compiled  under  the  direction  of  the 
National  Executive  Committee,  National  Headquarters  Socialist 
Party,  Chicago,  1908. 

Rodbertus,  Karl. 

Overproduction  and  Crises.  Translated  by  Julia  Franklin,  with 
an  introduction  by  John  B.  Clark,  Professor  of  Political  Economy 
in  Columbia  University.  London  and  New  York  (Chas. 
Scribner's  Sons),  1898. 

Rae,  John. 

Contemporary  Socialism.    Chas.  Scribner's  Sons,  New  York,  1901. 


262        A   LIST   OF   PUBLICATIONS 

Richardson,  N.  A.,  author  of  "Methods  of  Acquiring  National  Pos- 
session of  our  Industries." 
Introduction  to  Socialism  (Wayland's  Monthly,  No.  37).    Girard, 
Kansas,  1903. 

Simkhovitch,  Vladimir  G. 

Marxism  vs.  Socialism,  numbers  1-4.  Political  Science  Quarterly, 
Vols.  23-24.    Ginn  &  Co.,  1908-1909. 

Seager,  Henry,  Adjunct  Professor  of  Political  Economy  in  Columbia 
University, 
Introduction  to  Economics.    Henry  Holt  &  Co.,  New  York,  1904. 

Skelton,  0.  D.,  Ph.D.,  Sir  John  A.  Macdonald  Professor  of  Political 
Science,  Queen's  University,  Kingston,  Canada. 
Socialism  —  A  Critical  Analysis.    Boston  and  New  York,  Hough- 
ton Mifflin  Co.,  191 1. 

Spargo,  John. 

Socialism.    The  Macmillan  Co.,  New  York,  1906.     (Also  revised 

edition,  1909.) 
The  Socialists,  who  they  are  and  what  they  stand  for;   the  case  for 

socialism  plainly  stated.    C.  H.  Kerr  &  Co.,  Chicago,  1906. 
Capitalist  and  Laborer  and  Modern  Socialism.      Chas.  H.  Kerr 

&  Co.,  Chicago,  1907. 
The  Common  Sense  of   Socialism  —  a  series  of   letters  addressed 

to  Jonathan  Edwards,  of  Pittsburg.  Chas.  H.  Kerr  &  Co.,  Chicago, 

'      ^9°^-.  ... 
The  Spiritual  Significance  of  Modern  Socialism.    B.  W.  Huebsch, 

New  York,  1908. 
The  Substance  of  Socialism.    B.  W.  Huebsch,  New  York,  1909. 
Karl  Marx,  his  Life  and  Works. 
Sidelights  on  Contemporary  Socialism.    B.  W.  Huebsch,  New  York, 

1911. 

Simons,  A.  M.,  and  Kerr,  Chas.  H. 

Socialism  in  French  Municipalities.  Translated  from  Official 
Reports  by  Charles  H.  Kerr.  Introduction  by  A.  M.  Simons. 
Chicago  (Pocket  Library  of  Soc.  No.  16).  Chas.  H.  Kerr  &  Co., 
1900. 

Simons,  A.  M.,  Editor  of  the  Int.  Soc.  Rev. 

The  Philosophy  of  Socialism  (Pocket  Library  of  Soc.  No.  3  5).  No  date. 
Single  Tax  vs.  Socialism  (Pocket  Library  of  Socialism,  No.  6).  1899. 
Socialism  vs.  Anarchy  (Pocket  Library  of  Socialism,  No.  31).  1901. 
Socialism  and  the  Farmers  (Pocket  Library  of  Socialism,  No.  14). 

1900. 
Class  Struggles  in  America.     i6th  thousand  revised  and  enlarged. 

Chas.  H.  Kerr  &  Co.,  Chicago,  1907. 
The  American  Farmer.    Chas.  H.  Kerr  &  Co.,  Chicago,  1902. 

Seligman,  Edwin  R.  A.,  Professor  of  Political  Economy  and  Finance, 
Columbia  University,  etc. 


A   LIST   OF   PUBLICATIONS        263 

The  Economic  Interpretation  of  History.    The  MacmilHan  Co.; 

New  York,  1902. 
,  Principles  of  Economics,  with  Special  Reference  to  American  Con- 
ditions.   Third  edition,  revised  and  enlarged.    Longmans,  Green 
&  Co.,  New  York,  1907. 

Spahr,  Chas.  B.,  Ph.D. 

The  Concentration  of  Wealth  in  the  United  States.  Second  edition. 
Thos.  Y.  Crowell  &  Co.,  New  York,  1896. 

Sanial,  Lucien. 

_The  Socialist  Almanac  and  Treasury  of  Facts,  Vol.  I.  No.  i.    Pre- 
pared for  the  Socialist  Labor  Party  of  the  United  States.     New 
York,  1898. 
Socialist  Poster  No.  I.    Second  edition.    Issued  by  the  International 
Institute  of  Social  Science.    New  York,  1905. 

Schaeffle,  Dr.  A. 

The  Quintessence  of  Socialism  —  English  editbn.  Translated 
from  the  eighth  German  ed.  under  the  supervision  of  Bernard 
Bosanquet,  M.A.,  etc.     London,  1889. 

The  Impossibility  of  Social  Democracy,  being  a  supplement  to  the 
"  Quintessence  of  Socialism,"  authorized  English  ed.  with  a  preface 
by  Bernard  Bosanquet;  translated  from  the  fourth  German  edition 
by  A.  C.  Morant,  London,  1892. 

Shaw,  G.  Bernard  —  see  Fabian  Essays. 

Sombart,  Werner,  Professor  of  Political  Economy  at  the  Handelshoch- 
schule  in  Berlin,  etc. 
Socialism  and  the  Social  Movement  (translated  from  the  sixth,  en- 
larged,  German  edition,  with    Introduction   and   notes   by  M. 
Epstein,  M.A.,  Ph.D.).    Revised  edition.    London,  1909. 

Socialist  Labor  Party. 

Constitution  of  the  Socialist  Labor  Party  of  the  United  States  of 
America.  Adopted  at  the  Eleventh  National  Convention;  amended 
at  the  Twelfth  National  Convention.     New  York,  1908. 

Principles  of  the  Socialist  Labor  Party.    Undated. 

Socialist  Party. 

National  Constitution  of  the  Socialist  Party.     Chicago,  1908. 

Socialist  Campaign  Book  —  see  Patterson. 

Report  of  National  Secretary  to  National  Congress,  May  ij,  1910. 

Socialist  Party  National  Platform,  adopted  at  the  National  Con- 
vention assembled  at  Chicago,  May,  1908.  Wilshire  Book  Co., 
New  York,  1908. 

Handbook  of  National  Convention  of  the  Socialist  Party.      1904. 

Why  Socialists  Pay  Dues  (leaflet).  Issued  by  the  National  Com- 
mittee of  the  Socialist  Party,  Chicago.     Undated. 

State  Constitution  of  the  Socialist  Party  of  New  York.  New  York, 
1908. 

Socialist  Party  Municipal  Platform  of  New  York  City.  Pub- 
lished by  the  Socialist  Party  (leaflet).    New  York,  1909. 

By-Laws,  Local  New  York  Socialist  Party.  New  York.    Undated. 


264        A   LIST   OF   PUBLICATIONS 

Tugan-Baranowsky,  Dr.  Michael. 

Der  Moderne  Sozialismus  in  seiner  geschichtlichen  Entwickelung. 
Dresden,  1908. 

Thompson,  Carl  D.,  Socialist  Member  of  the  Wisconsin  State  Legislature. 

The  Constructive  Program  of  Socialism  as  illustrated  by  Measures 
Advanced  by  Socialists  in  Municipal,  State  and  National  Legis- 
lation.   Social  Democratic  Publishing  Co.,  Milwaukee,  1908. 

The  Rising  Tide  of  Socialism  (leaflet).  Issued  by  the  National 
Office  of  the  Socialist  Party,  Chicago,  191 1. 

Untennann,  Ernest. 

Marxian  Economics  —  A  popular  introduction  to  the  three  volumes 

of  Marx's  "Capital."    C.  H.  Kerr  &  Co.,  Chicago,  1907. 
Science  and  Revolution.    Chas.  H.  Kerr  &  Co.,  Chicago,  1905. 
The  World's  Revolutions.    Chas.  H.  Kerr  &  Co.,  Chicago,  1906. 

United  States  Official  Publications. 

Daily  Consular  and  Trade  Reports  —  Dept.  of  Commerc©  and 

Labor,  Bureau  of  Manufactures. 
Compendium  of  the  Eleventh  Census,  1890. 
Twelfth  Census,  Vols.  V.,  VIL    Occupations. 
Eleventh  Census.     Crime,  Pauperism  and  Benevolence. 
Tenth  Census.     Defective,  Dependent  and  Delinquent  Classes. 
Census  Report  on  Charitable  Institutions.     1904. 
Special  Report,  Paupers  in  Almshouses.     1904. 
Special  Census  of  Manufactures.     Pt.  I.      1905. 
Census  of  Manufactures,  Bulletin  93.    1905. 

Veblen,  Thorstein,  Ass.  Prof,  of  Pol.  Econ.  in  the  University  of  Chicago. 
The  Theory  of  Business  Enterprise.     Chas.  Scribner's  Sons,  New 

York,  1904. 
The  Socialist  Economics  of  Karl  Marx  and  his  Followers.   Quarterly 

Journal  of  Economics,  Vol.  XX-XXI. 

Vail,  Rev.  Chas.  H. 

Modern  Socialism.    Chas.  H.  Kerr  &  Co.,  Chicago,  1906. 

Vlag,  P. 

Cooperation,  compiled  for  the  American  Wholesale  Cooperative 
(undated  pamphlet).    New  York. 

Vandervelde,  Emile,    Member  of  the  Belgian   Chamber  of  Deputies. 
Collectivism  and  Industrial  Evolution.     Translated  by  Chas.  H. 
Kerr.     Chas.  H.  Kerr  &  Co.,  Chicago,  1904. 

Wilde,  Oscar. 

The  Soul  of  Man  under  Socialism.  An  Essay  in  Social  and  Esthetic 
Criticism  (undated  pamphlet).    M.  M.  Breslow  Co.,  New  York. 

Wood-Simons,  May. 

Woman  and  the  Social  Question  (Pocket  Library  of  Soc.  No.  i). 
Chas.  H.  Kerr  &  Co.,  Chicago,  1899. 


A   LIST   OF    PUBLICATIONS        265 

Work,  John  M. 

What's  So  and  What  Is  n't.    Chas.  H.  Kerr  &  Co.,  Chicago,  1907. 

Warner,  Amos  G. 

American   Charities,   a   study   in   Philanthropy  and   Economics. 
T.  Y.  Crowell  &  Co.,  New  York,  1894. 

Walker,  Francis  A.,  Ph.D.,  LL.D.,  President  of  Mass.  Institute  of  Tech- 
nology, etc. 
First  Lessons  in  Political  Economy.   Henry  Holt  &  Co.,  New  York, 

1889. 
Political  Economy.    Henry  Holt  &  Co.,  New  York,  1883. 

Wilshire,  Gaylord,  Editor  Wilshire's  Magazine. 

Wilshire  Editorials.      Wilshire  Book  Co.,  New  York  1906. 

Ward,  Lester  F. 

Applied  Sociology.     A  treatise  on  the  conscious  improvement  of 
society  by  society.    Ginn  &  Co.,  New  York,  1906. 


PERIODICALS 

The  Socialist  Party  Official  Bulletin.  Issued  monthly  by  the  National 
Committee  at  the  National  Headquarters,  Chicago. 

The  National  Committee  Weekly  Bulletin  of  the  Socialist  Party.  Issued 
privately. 

The  New  York  Worker.    Discontinued. 

The  New  York  Call. 

The  Western  Clarion,  published  by  the  Socialist'Party  of  Canada,  Van- 
couver, B.  C. 

The  Appeal  to  Reason,  Girard,  Kansas. 

The  Daily  People.    New  York  City. 

The  International  Socialist  Review.    Chicago.   / 

The  Christian  Socialist.     Chicago. 

The  New  York  Times. 

The  Political  Science  Quarterly.    New  York. 

The  Outlook.    New  York. 


A    001  072  723     8 


iiiiiiii 


